Is there something I’m missing about EnumerableLimit? It seems like I get an infinite cost anytime it’s in my path?
Thank you again, Eric On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 18:00 Eric Berryman <eric.berry...@gmail.com> wrote: > I see the red circles in the svg query plan I added to the gist. I’m just > not sure what it’s supposed to be telling me. > > Thank you! > Eric > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 11:35 Eric Berryman <eric.berry...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> 1.37.0 >> >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 11:28 Ruben Q L <rube...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Which Calcite version are you using? >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 4:22 PM Eric Berryman <eric.berry...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > I’ve noticed if I remove the limit, the EnumerableUnion works fine. So >>> it >>> > seems the infinite cost is coming from the EnumerableLimit outside of >>> the >>> > union. I have an LDAPSortLimit which is pushed past the union, and an >>> > EnumerableLimit >>> > is left outside the union, as you can see in the gist. >>> > >>> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 11:10 Eric Berryman <eric.berry...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Is there anymore information that would be helpful for me to give to >>> aide >>> > > in troubleshooting this? >>> > > >>> > > Thank you! >>> > > Eric >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 16:51 Eric Berryman <eric.berry...@gmail.com >>> > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> >>> > >> I seem to be struggling with unions still. Here is a gist with the >>> > output >>> > >> and svg of the plan. >>> > >> >>> > >> https://gist.github.com/berryma4/c4870dd4e292e0509d1c85c308b52e67 >>> > >> >>> > >> I need a little help on direction of what the svg is telling me. I >>> see >>> > >> the cost is infinite, but I don’t see where I’m missing a rule. >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> Thank you for your help, >>> > >> Eric >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 18:28 Eric Berryman < >>> eric.berry...@gmail.com> >>> > >> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >>> That didn't paste well. Here is a gist: >>> > >>> https://gist.github.com/berryma4/c6c09da050f273295edd23c045c63403 >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 4:58 PM Eric Berryman < >>> eric.berry...@gmail.com >>> > > >>> > >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >>> > >>>> I’m back from a long holiday, and seem stuck still on this >>> scenario. >>> > >>>> The plan gets created without any issues, but I get this error >>> while >>> > >>>> executing queries with unions. >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> Thank you again! >>> > >>>> Eric >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> Here is the plan dump and error after running >>> > >>>> relRunner.prepareStatement. >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> EnumerableProject(UserObject=[$0], id=[$3]): rowcount = 30.0, >>> > >>>> cumulative cost = {146.0 rows, 1393.2 cpu, 0.0 io}, id = 213 >>> > >>>> EnumerableLimit(fetch=[100]): rowcount = 30.0, cumulative cost = >>> > {116.0 >>> > >>>> rows, 1333.2 cpu, 0.0 io}, id = 212 EnumerableUnion(all=[true]): >>> > rowcount = >>> > >>>> 30.0, cumulative cost = {86.0 rows, 1303.2 cpu, 0.0 io}, id = 211 >>> > >>>> EnumerableProject(UserObject=[$0], id=[$3]): rowcount = 15.0, >>> > cumulative >>> > >>>> cost = {28.0 rows, 636.6 cpu, 0.0 io}, id = 207 >>> > LDAPToEnumerableConverter: >>> > >>>> rowcount = 15.0, cumulative cost = {13.0 rows, 21.6 cpu, 0.0 io}, >>> id >>> > = 206 >>> > >>>> LDAPFilter(condition=[=(UPPER($5), 'RUDD')]): rowcount = 15.0, >>> > cumulative >>> > >>>> cost = {11.5 rows, 20.1 cpu, 0.0 io}, id = 205 >>> > >>>> LDAPTableScan(table=[[SCIMUserSchema, cap_internet_ddpmildap]]): >>> > rowcount = >>> > >>>> 100.0, cumulative cost = {10.0 rows, 10.100000000000001 cpu, 0.0 >>> io}, >>> > id = >>> > >>>> 0 EnumerableProject(UserObject=[$0], id=[$3]): rowcount = 15.0, >>> > cumulative >>> > >>>> cost = {28.0 rows, 636.6 cpu, 0.0 io}, id = 210 >>> > LDAPToEnumerableConverter: >>> > >>>> rowcount = 15.0, cumulative cost = {13.0 rows, 21.6 cpu, 0.0 io}, >>> id >>> > = 209 >>> > >>>> LDAPFilter(condition=[=(UPPER($5), 'RUDD')]): rowcount = 15.0, >>> > cumulative >>> > >>>> cost = {11.5 rows, 20.1 cpu, 0.0 io}, id = 208 >>> > >>>> LDAPTableScan(table=[[SCIMUserSchema, prov_internet_ddpmildap]]): >>> > rowcount >>> > >>>> = 100.0, cumulative cost = {10.0 rows, 10.100000000000001 cpu, 0.0 >>> > io}, id >>> > >>>> = 2 >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> java.lang.AssertionError: null at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.adapter.enumerable.EnumerableLimit.<init>(EnumerableLimit.java:60) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.adapter.enumerable.EnumerableLimit.copy(EnumerableLimit.java:84) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.adapter.enumerable.EnumerableLimit.copy(EnumerableLimit.java:43) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.sql2rel.RelFieldTrimmer.trimFields(RelFieldTrimmer.java:378) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:103) >>> > >>>> at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:580) at >>> > >>>> >>> org.apache.calcite.util.ReflectUtil$2.invoke(ReflectUtil.java:533) at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.sql2rel.RelFieldTrimmer.dispatchTrimFields(RelFieldTrimmer.java:286) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.sql2rel.RelFieldTrimmer.trimChild(RelFieldTrimmer.java:228) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.sql2rel.RelFieldTrimmer.trimFields(RelFieldTrimmer.java:514) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:103) >>> > >>>> at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:580) at >>> > >>>> >>> org.apache.calcite.util.ReflectUtil$2.invoke(ReflectUtil.java:533) at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.sql2rel.RelFieldTrimmer.dispatchTrimFields(RelFieldTrimmer.java:286) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.sql2rel.RelFieldTrimmer.trim(RelFieldTrimmer.java:173) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.sql2rel.SqlToRelConverter.trimUnusedFields(SqlToRelConverter.java:567) >>> > >>>> at >>> > org.apache.calcite.prepare.Prepare.trimUnusedFields(Prepare.java:386) >>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.prepare.CalcitePrepareImpl$CalcitePreparingStmt.prepare_(CalcitePrepareImpl.java:1061) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.prepare.CalcitePrepareImpl$CalcitePreparingStmt.prepareRel(CalcitePrepareImpl.java:1026) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.prepare.CalcitePrepareImpl.prepare2_(CalcitePrepareImpl.java:687) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.prepare.CalcitePrepareImpl.prepare_(CalcitePrepareImpl.java:519) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.prepare.CalcitePrepareImpl.prepareSql(CalcitePrepareImpl.java:487) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.jdbc.CalciteConnectionImpl.parseQuery(CalciteConnectionImpl.java:237) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.jdbc.CalciteConnectionImpl.prepareStatement_(CalciteConnectionImpl.java:217) >>> > >>>> at >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> org.apache.calcite.jdbc.CalciteConnectionImpl.lambda$unwrap$0(CalciteConnectionImpl.java:187) >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 11:07 Ruben Q L <rube...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> Eric, if you want to use EnumerableUnion instead of implementing >>> your >>> > >>>>> own >>> > >>>>> Union, then I think you'll need to implement the appropriate >>> > Converter >>> > >>>>> [1] >>> > >>>>> to transform between conventions LDAP <=> ENUMERABLE >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> Best, >>> > >>>>> Ruben >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> [1] >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/rel/convert/Converter.java >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 3:56 PM Eric Berryman < >>> > eric.berry...@gmail.com >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> wrote: >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > I implement an LDAPUnion and rule to convert from >>> logicalunion, and >>> > >>>>> of >>> > >>>>> > course, the error goes away. But I didn’t implement the union >>> > >>>>> correctly, so >>> > >>>>> > nothing is returned in my query. Is there a way to have my >>> > LDAPUnion >>> > >>>>> > use EnumerableUnion, >>> > >>>>> > or a way to not have LDAPUnion and take care of this with a >>> rule? >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > Thank you again! >>> > >>>>> > Eric >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 14:24 Eric Berryman < >>> > eric.berry...@gmail.com >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > wrote: >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > > Well, I was wrong. That didn’t solve my problem with : >>> > >>>>> > > >>> > >>>>> > > Missing conversion is LogicalUnion[convention: NONE -> LDAP] >>> > >>>>> > > >>> > >>>>> > > Do I have to implement my own union? Is there a way I could >>> just >>> > >>>>> use the >>> > >>>>> > > EnumerableUnion? >>> > >>>>> > > ie. NONE -> Enumerable and skip implementing one for my ldap >>> > >>>>> datastore? >>> > >>>>> > > >>> > >>>>> > > Thank you! >>> > >>>>> > > Eric >>> > >>>>> > > >>> > >>>>> > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 09:00 Eric Berryman < >>> > >>>>> eric.berry...@gmail.com> >>> > >>>>> > > wrote: >>> > >>>>> > > >>> > >>>>> > >> When I register my tablescan object, and add my rules, I >>> also >>> > >>>>> added a >>> > >>>>> > >> removeRule for EnumerableRules.ENUMERABLE_MERGE_UNION_RULE, >>> and >>> > >>>>> now >>> > >>>>> > >> everything works with an offset also. >>> > >>>>> > >> >>> > >>>>> > >> Although, I don’t know why this is. I noticed the >>> > >>>>> EnumerableMergeUnion >>> > >>>>> > >> object in the plan, and thought I would try to remove it, >>> > because >>> > >>>>> it was >>> > >>>>> > >> different. >>> > >>>>> > >> >>> > >>>>> > >> Any explanation is appreciated, thank you!!! >>> > >>>>> > >> Eric >>> > >>>>> > >> >>> > >>>>> > >> >>> > >>>>> > >> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 18:02 Eric Berryman < >>> > >>>>> eric.berry...@gmail.com> >>> > >>>>> > >> wrote: >>> > >>>>> > >> >>> > >>>>> > >>> Hello! >>> > >>>>> > >>> >>> > >>>>> > >>> I seem to have an issue with my new limit rule which pushes >>> > down >>> > >>>>> to the >>> > >>>>> > >>> datastore. It works fine, unless I add an offset to the >>> fetch. >>> > >>>>> Where I >>> > >>>>> > end >>> > >>>>> > >>> up with the following error: >>> > >>>>> > >>> There are not enough rules… Missing conversion is >>> > >>>>> > >>> LogicalUnion[convention: NONE -> LDAP] >>> > >>>>> > >>> >>> > >>>>> > >>> Why would this only come up when an offset value is added? >>> > >>>>> > >>> >>> > >>>>> > >>> Thank you! >>> > >>>>> > >>> Eric >>> > >>>>> > >>> >>> > >>>>> > >>> >>> > >>>>> > >>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 09:25 Eric Berryman < >>> > >>>>> eric.berry...@gmail.com> >>> > >>>>> > >>> wrote: >>> > >>>>> > >>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>> That’s perfect >>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/main/cassandra/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/adapter/cassandra/CassandraRules.java#L401 >>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>> Thank you for such a quick response! >>> > >>>>> > >>>> Eric >>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 09:14 Michael Mior < >>> mm...@apache.org> >>> > >>>>> wrote: >>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Eric, >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Could you give a more specific example of the failure >>> > scenario >>> > >>>>> you're >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> experiencing? >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> For a simple example of how limits can be pushed down, >>> this >>> > is >>> > >>>>> done >>> > >>>>> > in >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> the >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Cassandra adapter with CassandraLimitRule. It matches an >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> EnumerableLimit on >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> top of a CassandraToEnumerableConverter and then converts >>> > that >>> > >>>>> limit >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> to a >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> CassandraLimit which passes along the limit and offset >>> > >>>>> information to >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> CassandraToEnumerableConverter for when the query is >>> > executed. >>> > >>>>> The >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> EnumerableLimit is then replaced with a CassandraLimit >>> > >>>>> effectively >>> > >>>>> > as a >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> placeholder to signal that the limit has been handled. >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Michael Mior >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> mm...@apache.org >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 8:44 AM Eric Berryman < >>> > >>>>> > eric.berry...@gmail.com >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> wrote: >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Hello! >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > When I add limit to my relbuilder object, the planner >>> gives >>> > >>>>> up. But >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> works >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > fine without it. >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > I wasn’t able to find any examples of using limit and >>> > >>>>> pushing the >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> limit >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > values down to a data source. >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Could someone help with some links on this subject? >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Thank you! >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Eric >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>> >>
