forked from duckdb/duckdb
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
Export anti, semi, and cross joins #19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
Tmonster
wants to merge
852
commits into
export_right_left_and_full_joins
from
export_anti_and_semi_joins
Closed
Export anti, semi, and cross joins #19
Tmonster
wants to merge
852
commits into
export_right_left_and_full_joins
from
export_anti_and_semi_joins
Conversation
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
Decimal separator option for CSV reader
feat(python): fsspec filesystems
Fix amalgamation build: returning (std::)move will otherwise be flagg…
…he correct format for read_csv_auto
Co-authored-by: Kirill Müller <krlmlr@users.noreply.github.com>
out of tree extension improvements
Fix checks on R-devel
Update editor config
Implement read_json and improve JSON parse errors
[Python] Add `read_csv` method
Add bar function
Remove console.log from UDF catch
Fix performance regression in read_csv_auto auto detection
…nctions Allowing lambdas in table functions
Add relational tests back
closing because we plan on introducing anti and semi join syntax |
Tmonster
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 3, 2024
I was investigating the following crash where a checkpoint task had its underlying resources being destroyed while it was still running. The two interesting threads are the following: ``` thread #1, name = 'duckling', stop reason = signal SIGTRAP frame #0: 0x0000ffff91bb71ec frame #1: 0x0000aaaad73a38e8 duckling`duckdb::InternalException::InternalException(this=<unavailable>, msg=<unavailable>) at exception.cpp:336:2 frame #2: 0x0000aaaad786eb68 duckling`duckdb::unique_ptr<duckdb::RowGroup, std::default_delete<duckdb::RowGroup>, true>::operator*() const [inlined] duckdb::unique_ptr<duckdb::RowGroup, std::default_delete<duckdb::RowGroup>, true>::AssertNotNull(null=<unavailable>) at unique_ptr.hpp:25:10 frame #3: 0x0000aaaad786eaf4 duckling`duckdb::unique_ptr<duckdb::RowGroup, std::default_delete<duckdb::RowGroup>, true>::operator*(this=0x0000aaacbb73e008) const at unique_ptr.hpp:34:4 frame #4: 0x0000aaaad787abbc duckling`duckdb::CheckpointTask::ExecuteTask(this=0x0000aaabec92be60) at row_group_collection.cpp:732:21 frame #5: 0x0000aaaad7756ea4 duckling`duckdb::BaseExecutorTask::Execute(this=0x0000aaabec92be60, mode=<unavailable>) at task_executor.cpp:72:3 frame #6: 0x0000aaaad7757e28 duckling`duckdb::TaskScheduler::ExecuteForever(this=0x0000aaaafda30e10, marker=0x0000aaaafda164a8) at task_scheduler.cpp:189:32 frame #7: 0x0000ffff91a031fc frame #8: 0x0000ffff91c0d5c8 thread #120, stop reason = signal 0 frame #0: 0x0000ffff91c71c24 frame #1: 0x0000ffff91e1264c frame #2: 0x0000ffff91e01888 frame #3: 0x0000ffff91e018f8 frame #4: 0x0000ffff91e01c10 frame #5: 0x0000ffff91e05afc frame #6: 0x0000ffff91e05e70 frame #7: 0x0000aaaad784b63c duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] std::_Sp_counted_base<(__gnu_cxx::_Lock_policy)2>::_M_release(this=<unavailable>) at shared_ptr_base.h:184:10 frame #8: 0x0000aaaad784b5b4 duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] std::__shared_count<(__gnu_cxx::_Lock_policy)2>::~__shared_count(this=<unavailable>) at shared_ptr_base.h:705:11 frame #9: 0x0000aaaad784b5ac duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] std::__shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, (__gnu_cxx::_Lock_policy)2>::~__shared_ptr(this=<unavailable>) at shared_ptr_base.h:1154:31 frame #10: 0x0000aaaad784b5ac duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>::~shared_ptr(this=<unavailable>) at shared_ptr_ipp.hpp:115:24 frame #11: 0x0000aaaad784b5ac duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] void std::_Destroy<duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>>(__pointer=<unavailable>) at stl_construct.h:151:19 frame #12: 0x0000aaaad784b5ac duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] void std::_Destroy_aux<false>::__destroy<duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>*>(__first=<unavailable>, __last=<unavailable>) at stl_construct.h:163:6 frame #13: 0x0000aaaad784b5a0 duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] void std::_Destroy<duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>*>(__first=<unavailable>, __last=<unavailable>) at stl_construct.h:195:7 frame #14: 0x0000aaaad784b5a0 duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] void std::_Destroy<duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>*, duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>>(__first=<unavailable>, __last=<unavailable>, (null)=<unavailable>) at alloc_traits.h:848:7 frame #15: 0x0000aaaad784b5a0 duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup() [inlined] std::vector<duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>, std::allocator<duckdb::shared_ptr<duckdb::ColumnData, true>>>::~vector(this=<unavailable>) at stl_vector.h:680:2 frame #16: 0x0000aaaad784b5a0 duckling`duckdb::RowGroup::~RowGroup(this=<unavailable>) at row_group.cpp:83:1 frame #17: 0x0000aaaad786ee18 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector() [inlined] std::default_delete<duckdb::RowGroup>::operator()(this=0x0000aaacbb73e1a8, __ptr=0x0000aaab75ae7860) const at unique_ptr.h:85:2 frame #18: 0x0000aaaad786ee10 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector() at unique_ptr.h:361:4 frame #19: 0x0000aaaad786ee08 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector() [inlined] duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>::~SegmentNode(this=0x0000aaacbb73e1a0) at segment_tree.hpp:21:8 frame #20: 0x0000aaaad786ee08 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector() [inlined] void std::_Destroy<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>(__pointer=0x0000aaacbb73e1a0) at stl_construct.h:151:19 frame #21: 0x0000aaaad786ee08 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector() [inlined] void std::_Destroy_aux<false>::__destroy<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>*>(__first=0x0000aaacbb73e1a0, __last=0x0000aaacbb751130) at stl_construct.h:163:6 frame #22: 0x0000aaaad786ede8 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector() [inlined] void std::_Destroy<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>*>(__first=<unavailable>, __last=0x0000aaacbb751130) at stl_construct.h:195:7 frame #23: 0x0000aaaad786ede8 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector() [inlined] void std::_Destroy<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>*, duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>(__first=<unavailable>, __last=0x0000aaacbb751130, (null)=0x0000fffefc81a908) at alloc_traits.h:848:7 frame #24: 0x0000aaaad786ede8 duckling`std::vector<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>, std::allocator<duckdb::SegmentNode<duckdb::RowGroup>>>::~vector(this=size=4883) at stl_vector.h:680:2 frame #25: 0x0000aaaad7857f74 duckling`duckdb::RowGroupCollection::Checkpoint(this=<unavailable>, writer=<unavailable>, global_stats=0x0000fffefc81a9c0) at row_group_collection.cpp:1017:1 frame #26: 0x0000aaaad788f02c duckling`duckdb::DataTable::Checkpoint(this=0x0000aaab04649e70, writer=0x0000aaab6584ea80, serializer=0x0000fffefc81ab38) at data_table.cpp:1427:14 frame #27: 0x0000aaaad7881394 duckling`duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::WriteTable(this=0x0000fffefc81b128, table=0x0000aaab023b78c0, serializer=0x0000fffefc81ab38) at checkpoint_manager.cpp:528:11 frame #28: 0x0000aaaad787ece4 duckling`duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint() [inlined] duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint(this=<unavailable>, obj=0x0000fffefc81ab38)::$_7::operator()(duckdb::Serializer::List&, unsigned long) const::'lambda'(duckdb::Serializer&)::operator()(duckdb::Serializer&) const at checkpoint_manager.cpp:181:43 frame #29: 0x0000aaaad787ecd8 duckling`duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint() [inlined] void duckdb::Serializer::List::WriteObject<duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint()::$_7::operator()(duckdb::Serializer::List&, unsigned long) const::'lambda'(duckdb::Serializer&)>(this=<unavailable>, f=(unnamed class) @ 0x0000600002cbd2b0) at serializer.hpp:385:2 frame #30: 0x0000aaaad787ecc4 duckling`duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint() [inlined] duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint()::$_7::operator()(this=<unavailable>, list=<unavailable>, i=2) const at checkpoint_manager.cpp:181:8 frame #31: 0x0000aaaad787ecb0 duckling`duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint() at serializer.hpp:151:4 frame #32: 0x0000aaaad787ec94 duckling`duckdb::SingleFileCheckpointWriter::CreateCheckpoint(this=0x0000fffefc81b128) at checkpoint_manager.cpp:179:13 frame #33: 0x0000aaaad78954a8 duckling`duckdb::SingleFileStorageManager::CreateCheckpoint(this=0x0000aaaafe1de140, options=(wal_action = DONT_DELETE_WAL, action = CHECKPOINT_IF_REQUIRED, type = FULL_CHECKPOINT)) at storage_manager.cpp:365:17 frame #34: 0x0000aaaad78baac0 duckling`duckdb::DuckTransactionManager::Checkpoint(this=0x0000aaaafe167e00, context=<unavailable>, force=<unavailable>) at duck_transaction_manager.cpp:198:18 frame #35: 0x0000aaaad69d02c0 duckling`md::Server::BackgroundCheckpointIfNeeded(this=0x0000aaaafdbfe900) at server.cpp:1983:31 frame #36: 0x0000aaaadac5d3f0 duckling`std::thread::_State_impl<std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>>::_M_run() [inlined] std::function<void ()>::operator()(this=<unavailable>) const at std_function.h:590:9 frame #37: 0x0000aaaadac5d3e0 duckling`std::thread::_State_impl<std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>>::_M_run() [inlined] md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0::operator()(this=0x0000aaaafdf169a8) const at background_cron_task.cpp:25:4 frame #38: 0x0000aaaadac5d30c duckling`std::thread::_State_impl<std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>>::_M_run() [inlined] void std::__invoke_impl<void, md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>((null)=<unavailable>, __f=0x0000aaaafdf169a8) at invoke.h:61:14 frame #39: 0x0000aaaadac5d30c duckling`std::thread::_State_impl<std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>>::_M_run() [inlined] std::__invoke_result<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>::type std::__invoke<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>(__fn=0x0000aaaafdf169a8) at invoke.h:96:14 frame #40: 0x0000aaaadac5d30c duckling`std::thread::_State_impl<std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>>::_M_run() [inlined] void std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>::_M_invoke<0ul>(this=0x0000aaaafdf169a8, (null)=<unavailable>) at std_thread.h:259:13 frame #41: 0x0000aaaadac5d30c duckling`std::thread::_State_impl<std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>>::_M_run() [inlined] std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>::operator()(this=0x0000aaaafdf169a8) at std_thread.h:266:11 frame #42: 0x0000aaaadac5d30c duckling`std::thread::_State_impl<std::thread::_Invoker<std::tuple<md::BackgroundCronTask::Start(unsigned long)::$_0>>>::_M_run(this=0x0000aaaafdf169a0) at std_thread.h:211:13 frame #43: 0x0000ffff91a031fc frame #44: 0x0000ffff91c0d5c8 ``` The problem is that if there's an IO exception being thrown in `RowGroupCollection::Checkpoint` after some (but not all) checkpoint tasks have been scheduled but before `checkpoint_state.executor.WorkOnTasks();` is called, it results in an InternalException / DuckDB crash as the `Checkpoint ` method does not wait for the scheduled tasks to have completed before destroying the referenced resources.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This is a WIP PR mostly for feedback. The Anti and semi joins are harder to implement because the require some changes to how we set up relational joins. Since anti and semi joins require comparisons to results from subqueries, a where clause needs to be introduced to check if any results from the left relation are in the result/projection of the right relation. I.E
select left_columns where left_columns_subset NOT IN (right_columns).
This means the user also doesn't define a condition since ANTI and SEMI have a predetermined condition. The absence of this condition meant that I needed to add a new constructor for a join relation. For anti and semi joins the user needs to pass three arguments, the left table, the left columns needed for comparison in the condition, and the right columns needed for comparison in the condition.
this makes me think there is a way to implement anti and semi with conditions. We just need to extract the relations from the passed condition. I believe this is possible.
Anyway, as mentioned, this is WIP. I plan on refining it a bit more. I am especially interested in what people thinkt h eIf anything comes to mind about what I might be missing let me know.
For cross joins, we just do an inner join with a comparison that always evaluates to true.