[improvement](pipeline) Use hash shuffle local exchange if no require…#35454
Merged
Gabriel39 merged 3 commits intoapache:masterfrom May 28, 2024
Merged
[improvement](pipeline) Use hash shuffle local exchange if no require…#35454Gabriel39 merged 3 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Gabriel39 merged 3 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
…d data distribution
|
Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris. Since 2024-03-18, the Document has been moved to doris-website. |
Contributor
Author
|
run buildall |
Contributor
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
|
TeamCity be ut coverage result: |
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 41046 ms |
TPC-DS: Total hot run time: 170440 ms |
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 30.32 s |
Contributor
Author
|
run buildall |
Contributor
Author
|
run buildall |
Contributor
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
1 similar comment
Contributor
|
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 41368 ms |
|
TeamCity be ut coverage result: |
TPC-DS: Total hot run time: 172806 ms |
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 30.62 s |
github-actions
bot
added
the
approved
Contributor
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
Contributor
|
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
BiteTheDDDDt
approved these changes
May 28, 2024
dataroaring
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 28, 2024
#35454) …d data distribution This is a follow-up for #34122 . Currently, we use bucket shuffle local exchange to re-distribution data before a 'colocated' operator. But if no colocate/bucket-shuffle join followed, bucket-shuffle for this operator is not always suitable because the parallism will be restricted by the account of buckets
Gabriel39
added a commit
to Gabriel39/incubator-doris
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 28, 2024
apache#35454) …d data distribution This is a follow-up for apache#34122 . Currently, we use bucket shuffle local exchange to re-distribution data before a 'colocated' operator. But if no colocate/bucket-shuffle join followed, bucket-shuffle for this operator is not always suitable because the parallism will be restricted by the account of buckets
This was referenced Aug 28, 2024
Gabriel39
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2024
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
5 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.
…d data distribution
This is a follow-up for #34122 .
Currently, we use bucket shuffle local exchange to re-distribution data before a 'colocated' operator. But if no colocate/bucket-shuffle join followed, bucket-shuffle for this operator is not always suitable because the parallism will be restricted by the account of buckets.
Issue Number: close #xxx
Further comments
If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion at dev@doris.apache.org by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...