feat: add ExchangeRel support to core #602
Open
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
cht42
force-pushed
the
cht/exchange
branch
2 times, most recently
from
458aef0 to
8c33967
Compare
nielspardon
reviewed
Nov 17, 2025
isthmus/src/main/java/io/substrait/isthmus/SubstraitRelNodeConverter.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Contributor
Author
|
@nielspardon do you have any other comments ? or is the PR good to merge ? |
nielspardon
reviewed
Nov 19, 2025
Member
nielspardon
left a comment
nielspardon
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the changes look good. I only have some minor remarks
Comment on lines
1020
to
1025
| ProtoExpressionConverter converter = | ||
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | ||
| List<FieldReference> fieldReferences = | ||
| rel.getScatterByFields().getFieldsList().stream() | ||
| .map(converter::from) | ||
| .collect(Collectors.toList()); |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do realize most of the other usages of ProtoExpressionConverter in this class also just use converter as the variable name. Given that we have so many different converters in the code base it might make sense to use a more specific variable name to make it clear which one it is. We could use the approach from the newAggregate() method in this class which calls the variable protoExprConverter.
Suggested change
| ProtoExpressionConverter converter = | |
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | |
| List<FieldReference> fieldReferences = | |
| rel.getScatterByFields().getFieldsList().stream() | |
| .map(converter::from) | |
| .collect(Collectors.toList()); | |
| ProtoExpressionConverter protoExprConverter = | |
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | |
| List<FieldReference> fieldReferences = | |
| rel.getScatterByFields().getFieldsList().stream() | |
| .map(protoExprConverter::from) | |
| .collect(Collectors.toList()); |
Comment on lines
1048
to
1056
| ProtoExpressionConverter converter = | ||
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | ||
|
|
||
| ImmutableSingleBucketExchange.Builder builder = | ||
| SingleBucketExchange.builder() | ||
| .input(input) | ||
| .partitionCount(rel.getPartitionCount()) | ||
| .targets(targets) | ||
| .expression(converter.from(rel.getSingleTarget().getExpression())); |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
same here, we could use a more specific variable name
Suggested change
| ProtoExpressionConverter converter = | |
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | |
| ImmutableSingleBucketExchange.Builder builder = | |
| SingleBucketExchange.builder() | |
| .input(input) | |
| .partitionCount(rel.getPartitionCount()) | |
| .targets(targets) | |
| .expression(converter.from(rel.getSingleTarget().getExpression())); | |
| ProtoExpressionConverter protoExprConverter = | |
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | |
| ImmutableSingleBucketExchange.Builder builder = | |
| SingleBucketExchange.builder() | |
| .input(input) | |
| .partitionCount(rel.getPartitionCount()) | |
| .targets(targets) | |
| .expression(protoExprConverter.from(rel.getSingleTarget().getExpression())); |
Comment on lines
1072
to
1081
| ProtoExpressionConverter converter = | ||
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | ||
|
|
||
| ImmutableMultiBucketExchange.Builder builder = | ||
| MultiBucketExchange.builder() | ||
| .input(input) | ||
| .partitionCount(rel.getPartitionCount()) | ||
| .targets(targets) | ||
| .expression(converter.from(rel.getMultiTarget().getExpression())) | ||
| .constrainedToCount(rel.getMultiTarget().getConstrainedToCount()); |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
same here, we could use a more specific variable name
Suggested change
| ProtoExpressionConverter converter = | |
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | |
| ImmutableMultiBucketExchange.Builder builder = | |
| MultiBucketExchange.builder() | |
| .input(input) | |
| .partitionCount(rel.getPartitionCount()) | |
| .targets(targets) | |
| .expression(converter.from(rel.getMultiTarget().getExpression())) | |
| .constrainedToCount(rel.getMultiTarget().getConstrainedToCount()); | |
| ProtoExpressionConverter protoExprConverter = | |
| new ProtoExpressionConverter(lookup, extensions, input.getRecordType(), this); | |
| ImmutableMultiBucketExchange.Builder builder = | |
| MultiBucketExchange.builder() | |
| .input(input) | |
| .partitionCount(rel.getPartitionCount()) | |
| .targets(targets) | |
| .expression(protoExprConverter.from(rel.getMultiTarget().getExpression())) | |
| .constrainedToCount(rel.getMultiTarget().getConstrainedToCount()); |
Comment on lines
629
to
634
| if (target.getType() instanceof TargetType.Uri) { | ||
| builder.setUri(((TargetType.Uri) target.getType()).getUri()); | ||
| } | ||
| if (target.getType() instanceof TargetType.Extended) { | ||
| builder.setExtended(((TargetType.Extended) target.getType()).getExtended()); | ||
| } |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
given that TargetType.Uri and TargetType.Extended are classes target.getType() can not be both so I would write this with an else if:
Suggested change
| if (target.getType() instanceof TargetType.Uri) { | |
| builder.setUri(((TargetType.Uri) target.getType()).getUri()); | |
| } | |
| if (target.getType() instanceof TargetType.Extended) { | |
| builder.setExtended(((TargetType.Extended) target.getType()).getExtended()); | |
| } | |
| if (target.getType() instanceof TargetType.Uri) { | |
| builder.setUri(((TargetType.Uri) target.getType()).getUri()); | |
| } else if (target.getType() instanceof TargetType.Extended) { | |
| builder.setExtended(((TargetType.Extended) target.getType()).getExtended()); | |
| } |
Comment on lines
221
to
278
| .append("=partitionCount") | ||
| .append(exchange.getPartitionCount) | ||
| .append("=targets") | ||
| .append(exchange.getTargets) | ||
| .append("fields=") | ||
| .append(exchange.getFields) | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| override def visit(exchange: SingleBucketExchange, context: EmptyVisitationContext): String = { | ||
| withBuilder(exchange, 10)( | ||
| builder => { | ||
| builder | ||
| .append("=partitionCount") | ||
| .append(exchange.getPartitionCount) | ||
| .append("=targets") | ||
| .append(exchange.getTargets) | ||
| .append("=expression") | ||
| .append(exchange.getExpression) | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| override def visit(exchange: MultiBucketExchange, context: EmptyVisitationContext): String = { | ||
| withBuilder(exchange, 10)( | ||
| builder => { | ||
| builder | ||
| .append("=partitionCount") | ||
| .append(exchange.getPartitionCount) | ||
| .append("=targets") | ||
| .append(exchange.getTargets) | ||
| .append("=expression") | ||
| .append(exchange.getExpression) | ||
| .append("=constrainedToCount") | ||
| .append(exchange.getConstrainedToCount) | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| override def visit(exchange: RoundRobinExchange, context: EmptyVisitationContext): String = { | ||
| withBuilder(exchange, 10)( | ||
| builder => { | ||
| builder | ||
| .append("=partitionCount") | ||
| .append(exchange.getPartitionCount) | ||
| .append("=targets") | ||
| .append(exchange.getTargets) | ||
| .append("=exact") | ||
| .append(exchange.getExact) | ||
| }) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| override def visit(exchange: BroadcastExchange, context: EmptyVisitationContext): String = { | ||
| withBuilder(exchange, 10)( | ||
| builder => { | ||
| builder | ||
| .append("=partitionCount") | ||
| .append(exchange.getPartitionCount) | ||
| .append("=targets") | ||
| .append(exchange.getTargets) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
shouldn't the equals sign always be the suffix of these string literals?
Member
|
Thanks for addressing the feedback. the one thing I didn't notice yesterday which would be great if you can take care of is to also add some unit tests for the changes in the core. We have relation roundtrip test here which you can mirror: https://github.com/substrait-io/substrait-java/tree/main/core/src/test/java/io/substrait/type/proto |
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.
Implement ExchangeRel in core. the spec https://github.com/substrait-io/substrait/blob/main/proto/substrait/algebra.proto#L470