add ExecutionPlan::dynamic_expressions() method - #24068
Open
jayshrivastava wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
github-actions
Bot
added
core
|
Thank you for opening this pull request! Reviewer note: cargo-semver-checks reported the current version number is not SemVer-compatible with the changes in this pull request (compared against the base branch). Details |
jayshrivastava
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 4, 2026 20:24
jayshrivastava
changed the title
LiaCastaneda
reviewed
Aug 5, 2026
LiaCastaneda
left a comment
LiaCastaneda
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
iiuc the motivation of this PR is: this function already existed but was not part of the trait. This PR updates it to be part of the trait because, for #23814, we need to differentiate which nodes are consumers and which are producers, and this function was implemented only by producers (and used for serialization, for example)
I guess we could use apply_expressions, downcast to the node, and then decide which nodes are producers and which are consumers. However, that might not be the cleanest approach, since the list of producers might vary.
Comment on lines
+179
to
+181
| fn dynamic_expressions(&self) -> Vec<Arc<dyn PhysicalExpr>> { | ||
| Vec::new() | ||
| } |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you think a better name would be dynamic_expressions_produced, or something that indicates it only returns dynamic filters that are produced? I think this name can be a bit misleading and might be interpreted as returning any dynamic filters the node is holding, whether it is a consumer holding the dynamic filters it will consume or a producer holding the dynamic filters it will produce. I had to read this comment to understand the motivation behind it
| vec![&self.left, &self.right] | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn dynamic_expressions(&self) -> Vec<Arc<dyn PhysicalExpr>> { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this function is supposed to be the promotion of the non trait function dynamic_filter_expr, should we remove dynamic_filter_expr?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
ExecutionPlannodes discoverable #23814Rationale for this change
External users who wish to propagate dynamic filter updates across network boundaries need to know in which direction updates need to flow. Thus
ExecutionPlan::apply_expressionsis not enough. The proposal in #23814 is to provide a separate API for dynamic filter producers.What changes are included in this PR?
This change adds a new method
ExecutionPlan::dynamic_expressions(&self) -> Vec<Arc<dyn PhysicalExpr>>which should return dynamic filters produced by theExecutionPlan.Are these changes tested?
Yes. Adds a new invariant that all expressions returned by
ExecutionPlan::dynamic_expressionshave an expression id.Are there any user-facing changes?
There's a new API,
ExecutionPlan::dynamic_expressions(&self) -> Vec<Arc<dyn PhysicalExpr>>