Is there some documentation or best practice doc about how using both of the two planners ?
I guess you have to pass a set of rules to the HepPlanner in order to perform some simpler steps and then pass other rules to VolcanoPlanner in order to create the physical plan. What is the RelNode to pass from the HepPlanner to the VolcanoPlanner ? // parse SqlNode n = planner.parse(query); // validate n = planner.validate(n); // create "logical plan" RelNode logicalPlan = planner.rel(n).project(); .... // get Volcano from "logicalPlan" RelOptCluster cluster = logicalPlan.getCluster(); elOptPlanner optPlanner = cluster.getPlanner(); .... // perform physical planning RelNode bestExp = optPlanner.findBestExp(); Regards Enrico Il giorno mar 4 ago 2020 alle ore 08:05 Meron Avigdor < [email protected]> ha scritto: > Thanks Rui and Stamatis for the clarification. I was probably misled by the > documentation, > as it stated that there are 2 implementations for planner rules. Thus I > figured that this is configurable in some way. > Also, it was mentioned that the Heuristic approach carried by the > HepPlanner has less overhead. > > If you say the two are complementary to each other, I will approach it > differently. > Thank you for the assistance. > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:50 AM Stamatis Zampetakis <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Meron, > > > > The two planners are not equivalent so the comparison is not totally > fair. > > Even if you apply the same ruleset it does not mean that you are going > > to obtain the same plan. > > > > The two planners are complementary to each other and they are used in > > different stages of the optimization process thus it is not possible to > use > > exclusively one or the other. For the same reason I think it will be > tricky > > to > > add such configuration. > > > > If you notice a performance problem with the existing planners or have > > ideas to improve them feel free to file a JIRA. > > > > Best, > > Stamatis > > > > On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 10:38 PM Rui Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I tried to dig into the Calcite codebase and found there is likely no > way > > > to enable JDBC codepath: > > > 1. There is no planner config in CalciteConnectionProperty [1]. > > > 2. In CalcitePrepareImpl, there is only one createPlannerFactory with > > one > > > createPlanner, in which VolcanoPlanner is used [2]. > > > > > > > > > If my understanding is correct, then there could be an improvement that > > > adds a config to CalciteConnectionProperty, and use that config to > > control > > > which planner to use by JDBC approach. > > > > > > > > > [1]: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/master/core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/config/CalciteConnectionProperty.java#L37 > > > [2]: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/2088488ac8327b19512a76a122cae2961fc551c3/core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/prepare/CalcitePrepareImpl.java#L427 > > > > > > > > > -Rui > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 8:55 AM Meron Avigdor < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi. > > > > I have implemented an extension of org.apache.calcite.jdbc.Driver, > and > > I > > > > have the model handler extend org.apache.calcite.avatica.HandlerImpl > > > > > > > > For performance optimizations, I would like to test VolcanoPlanner > vs. > > > > HepPlanner > > > > as the documentation says that the latter is faster. > > > > > > > > How is this to be configured? I could not find a hook point to return > > the > > > > planner to be used. > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > Meron > > > > > > > > > >
