DataFusion 55: eliminate_cross_join drops a join key that reads two tables of a cross join, and returns wrong rows — draft for upstream

未关闭
  • 哪里不对？
#299 0 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

维护者通常 3 天内回复

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
4/5
预计耗时
3-5 天
新手友好度
15/100
Issue 类型
缺陷
描述清晰度
基本清楚
活跃度
活跃
技术栈
python, sql
领域
databases

调研方向

The repro is the Python snippet in the issue body, using datafusion-python 55.0.0 and a two-table cross join with two equality keys. Run it, then compare with DuckDB's output; the issue says the correct answer is the rows (0, 0, 10.0) and (0, 1, 20.0). The suspect is the optimizer rule eliminate_cross_join in apache/datafusion, so the fix belongs upstream rather than in this repo. Check whether PR apache/datafusion#26786 already fixes it on main before filing. Done means a clean upstream report with this repro, or a confirmed fix there.

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

bug ml

🌀 Claude: A wrong answer in DataFusion 55. An inner join has two equality keys, and one of them reads two tables of an earlier cross join: b.i = a.i + t.d. The optimizer rule eliminate_cross_join reorders the joins and keeps the other key, b.j = a.j, but drops this one, so the query returns every row that matches on j.

import datafusion
import pyarrow as pa

ctx = datafusion.SessionContext()
ctx.register_record_batches("x", [pa.table({"i": [0, 0, 1, 1], "j": [0, 1, 0, 1], "v": [1.0, 2.0, 10.0, 20.0]}).to_batches()])
ctx.register_record_batches("t", [pa.table({"d": [1]}).to_batches()])
q = """SELECT a.i, a.j, b.v FROM x a CROSS JOIN t
       JOIN x b ON b.i = a.i + t.d AND b.j = a.j ORDER BY 1, 2, 3"""
print(ctx.sql(q).to_pylist())
  • Expected, as DuckDB 1.5.6 returns: (0, 0, 10.0) and (0, 1, 20.0). Only a.i = 0 has a row at i + 1.
  • Got, on DataFusion 55.0.0 (datafusion-python 55.0.0, Python 3.12, Linux x86-64): all 8 combinations of a and b with the same j, including (1, 0, 1.0), which no row satisfies.

The bug needs all three of:

  • the cross join, written CROSS JOIN t or JOIN t ON true; the comma-join form, FROM x a, t, x b WHERE …, is correct;
  • a key that reads both inputs of the cross join;
  • a second equality key. With ON b.i = a.i + t.d alone, the answer is right.

EXPLAIN VERBOSE shows where it happens. After extract_equijoin_predicate, the join is Inner Join: a.i + t.d = b.i, a.j = b.j over Cross Join(a, t). After eliminate_cross_join, it is Cross Join(Inner Join: a.j = b.j (a, b), t), and the key a.i + t.d = b.i is gone from the plan.

How it was found: writing a bilinear upsampling as SQL, for an ML demo in benchmarks/ml. The upsampling cross-joins each coarse cell with a small table of taps, then joins the cell each tap reads on its latitude and longitude. DataFusion's answer was off by a factor of about 20, and DuckDB's matched PyTorch to 2e-7.

No existing issue in apache/datafusion matches. apache/datafusion#26786 (merged 2026-10-31) refactors this rule; whether it fixes this needs checking on main.

Upstream: report to apache/datafusion with the repro above. The fix is in eliminate_cross_join, where an equality key whose side reads several inputs of the flattened cross join has to stay a join filter, or be placed on the join that brings those inputs together.

主要语言
Python
星标
142
派生
19
平均合并
3 天 47 分钟
30 天内合并 PR
8

环境准备

  • 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
  • 没有 Pull Request 模板
  • 阅读贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

xqlsystems/xarray-sql 的其他 Issue

查看 xqlsystems/xarray-sql 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。