Read CSV format text from stdin or memory#54
Merged
alamb merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom Apr 26, 2021
Merged
Conversation
alamb
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2021
Contributor
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this PR is good -- the only thing that is wonky to me is that if you Clone one of these readers it won't work. However, in this case the error will be clear so I think this PR can be merged and if anyone cares about the Clone behavior we can fix it in a follow on PR.
Thanks again @heymind
What do you think @Dandandan / @andygrove ?
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #54 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 76.24% 76.20% -0.05%
==========================================
Files 134 134
Lines 23051 23199 +148
==========================================
+ Hits 17576 17679 +103
- Misses 5475 5520 +45
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Dandandan
reviewed
Apr 26, 2021
| Path(String), | ||
|
|
||
| /// Read CSV data from a reader | ||
| Reader(Mutex<Option<Box<dyn Read + Send + Sync + 'static>>>), |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How would this look if we would support multiple readers/partitions?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also I am wondering, if we do it like this, we would we need to do the same for json/xml/etc sources that should support essentially the same to avoid reimplementing it for each format.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest we file a follow on ticket for this work (supporting Reader input for JSON / XML sources). As you say I don't think it needs to be part of this PR.
Contributor
|
Looks good to me, thanks @heymind . |
Dandandan
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2021
houqp
added
api change
unkloud
pushed a commit
to unkloud/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2025
ewgenius
pushed a commit
to ewgenius/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 23, 2025
fix: More dangling references (apache#54) * fix: More dangling references * test: Add tests for remove_dangling_identifiers UPSTREAM NOTE: This PR was attempted to be upstreamed in apache#13405 - but it was not accepted due to the complexity it brought. Phillip needs to figure out what a good solution that solves our problem and can be upstreamed is.
aditanase
pushed a commit
to hstack/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2025
fix: More dangling references (apache#54) * fix: More dangling references * test: Add tests for remove_dangling_identifiers UPSTREAM NOTE: This PR was attempted to be upstreamed in apache#13405 - but it was not accepted due to the complexity it brought. Phillip needs to figure out what a good solution that solves our problem and can be upstreamed is.
zhuqi-lucas
added a commit
to zhuqi-lucas/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ceSorting ## Summary Replace the separate `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` optimizer rules with a single `EnsureRequirements` rule in the default optimizer chain. This makes the composition idempotent by fixing distribution-awareness in `pushdown_sorts` and fetch preservation in `EnforceDistribution`. ## Problem `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` are coupled through `SortExec.preserve_partitioning` but run as independent rules. This caused: 1. **Production 502 errors**: `pushdown_sorts` set `preserve_partitioning=true` without `SortPreservingMergeExec`, violating `SinglePartition` requirements from `GlobalLimitExec` → `SanityCheckPlan` failure. 2. **Non-idempotent composition**: Running the rules multiple times produced different (sometimes invalid) plans. 3. **Lost fetch values** (apache#14150): `EnforceDistribution` dropped `fetch` from `SortPreservingMergeExec` when stripping and re-adding distribution operators. DataFusion was the only major engine with separate rules — Spark (`EnsureRequirements`) and Presto (`AddExchanges`) use a single rule. ## Changes ### `EnsureRequirements` rule (new) - Composes `EnforceDistribution::optimize()` + `EnforceSorting::optimize()` - Replaces both rules in the default optimizer chain - 53 comprehensive tests including idempotency verification ### Distribution-aware `pushdown_sorts` (fix) - Add `distribution_requirement` field to `ParentRequirements` - New `add_sort_above_with_distribution()` inserts `SortPreservingMergeExec` when parent requires `SinglePartition` and input has multiple partitions - Propagate distribution through recursion with `stronger_distribution()` - Reset distribution below partition-merging nodes (SPM, single-partition outputs) ### Fix `EnforceDistribution` fetch preservation (apache#14150) - `remove_dist_changing_operators()` now saves fetch from removed SPM/Coalesce - `add_merge_on_top()` re-applies saved fetch to new operators ## Testing | Suite | Result | |-------|--------| | EnsureRequirements (new) | 53 passed | | enforce_sorting (existing) | 124 passed, 0 regressions | | enforce_distribution (existing) | 66 passed, 0 regressions | | SLT (465 files) | 1 pre-existing failure only | | **Total** | **243 unit + 464 SLT, 0 new failures** | Idempotency verified: - All partition counts 1-64 - Triple + 10x consecutive optimization passes - SortMergeJoin, HashJoin, Window, Aggregate topologies - PR apache#53/apache#54 regression scenarios - apache#14150 fetch preservation across passes Closes: apache#14150 Part of: apache#21973
zhuqi-lucas
added a commit
to zhuqi-lucas/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ceSorting ## Summary Replace the separate `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` optimizer rules with a single `EnsureRequirements` rule in the default optimizer chain. This makes the composition idempotent by fixing distribution-awareness in `pushdown_sorts` and fetch preservation in `EnforceDistribution`. ## Problem `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` are coupled through `SortExec.preserve_partitioning` but run as independent rules. This caused: 1. **Production 502 errors**: `pushdown_sorts` set `preserve_partitioning=true` without `SortPreservingMergeExec`, violating `SinglePartition` requirements from `GlobalLimitExec` → `SanityCheckPlan` failure. 2. **Non-idempotent composition**: Running the rules multiple times produced different (sometimes invalid) plans. 3. **Lost fetch values** (apache#14150): `EnforceDistribution` dropped `fetch` from `SortPreservingMergeExec` when stripping and re-adding distribution operators. DataFusion was the only major engine with separate rules — Spark (`EnsureRequirements`) and Presto (`AddExchanges`) use a single rule. ## Changes ### `EnsureRequirements` rule (new) - Composes `EnforceDistribution::optimize()` + `EnforceSorting::optimize()` - Replaces both rules in the default optimizer chain - 53 comprehensive tests including idempotency verification ### Distribution-aware `pushdown_sorts` (fix) - Add `distribution_requirement` field to `ParentRequirements` - New `add_sort_above_with_distribution()` inserts `SortPreservingMergeExec` when parent requires `SinglePartition` and input has multiple partitions - Propagate distribution through recursion with `stronger_distribution()` - Reset distribution below partition-merging nodes (SPM, single-partition outputs) ### Fix `EnforceDistribution` fetch preservation (apache#14150) - `remove_dist_changing_operators()` now saves fetch from removed SPM/Coalesce - `add_merge_on_top()` re-applies saved fetch to new operators ## Testing | Suite | Result | |-------|--------| | EnsureRequirements (new) | 53 passed | | enforce_sorting (existing) | 124 passed, 0 regressions | | enforce_distribution (existing) | 66 passed, 0 regressions | | SLT (465 files) | 1 pre-existing failure only | | **Total** | **243 unit + 464 SLT, 0 new failures** | Idempotency verified: - All partition counts 1-64 - Triple + 10x consecutive optimization passes - SortMergeJoin, HashJoin, Window, Aggregate topologies - PR apache#53/apache#54 regression scenarios - apache#14150 fetch preservation across passes Closes: apache#14150 Part of: apache#21973
zhuqi-lucas
added a commit
to zhuqi-lucas/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ceSorting ## Summary Replace the separate `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` optimizer rules with a single `EnsureRequirements` rule in the default optimizer chain. This makes the composition idempotent by fixing distribution-awareness in `pushdown_sorts` and fetch preservation in `EnforceDistribution`. ## Problem `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` are coupled through `SortExec.preserve_partitioning` but run as independent rules. This caused: 1. **Production 502 errors**: `pushdown_sorts` set `preserve_partitioning=true` without `SortPreservingMergeExec`, violating `SinglePartition` requirements from `GlobalLimitExec` → `SanityCheckPlan` failure. 2. **Non-idempotent composition**: Running the rules multiple times produced different (sometimes invalid) plans. 3. **Lost fetch values** (apache#14150): `EnforceDistribution` dropped `fetch` from `SortPreservingMergeExec` when stripping and re-adding distribution operators. DataFusion was the only major engine with separate rules — Spark (`EnsureRequirements`) and Presto (`AddExchanges`) use a single rule. ## Changes ### `EnsureRequirements` rule (new) - Composes `EnforceDistribution::optimize()` + `EnforceSorting::optimize()` - Replaces both rules in the default optimizer chain - 53 comprehensive tests including idempotency verification ### Distribution-aware `pushdown_sorts` (fix) - Add `distribution_requirement` field to `ParentRequirements` - New `add_sort_above_with_distribution()` inserts `SortPreservingMergeExec` when parent requires `SinglePartition` and input has multiple partitions - Propagate distribution through recursion with `stronger_distribution()` - Reset distribution below partition-merging nodes (SPM, single-partition outputs) ### Fix `EnforceDistribution` fetch preservation (apache#14150) - `remove_dist_changing_operators()` now saves fetch from removed SPM/Coalesce - `add_merge_on_top()` re-applies saved fetch to new operators ## Testing | Suite | Result | |-------|--------| | EnsureRequirements (new) | 53 passed | | enforce_sorting (existing) | 124 passed, 0 regressions | | enforce_distribution (existing) | 66 passed, 0 regressions | | SLT (465 files) | 1 pre-existing failure only | | **Total** | **243 unit + 464 SLT, 0 new failures** | Idempotency verified: - All partition counts 1-64 - Triple + 10x consecutive optimization passes - SortMergeJoin, HashJoin, Window, Aggregate topologies - PR apache#53/apache#54 regression scenarios - apache#14150 fetch preservation across passes Closes: apache#14150 Part of: apache#21973
zhuqi-lucas
added a commit
to zhuqi-lucas/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ceSorting ## Summary Replace the separate `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` optimizer rules with a single `EnsureRequirements` rule in the default optimizer chain. This makes the composition idempotent by fixing distribution-awareness in `pushdown_sorts` and fetch preservation in `EnforceDistribution`. ## Problem `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` are coupled through `SortExec.preserve_partitioning` but run as independent rules. This caused: 1. **Production 502 errors**: `pushdown_sorts` set `preserve_partitioning=true` without `SortPreservingMergeExec`, violating `SinglePartition` requirements from `GlobalLimitExec` → `SanityCheckPlan` failure. 2. **Non-idempotent composition**: Running the rules multiple times produced different (sometimes invalid) plans. 3. **Lost fetch values** (apache#14150): `EnforceDistribution` dropped `fetch` from `SortPreservingMergeExec` when stripping and re-adding distribution operators. DataFusion was the only major engine with separate rules — Spark (`EnsureRequirements`) and Presto (`AddExchanges`) use a single rule. ## Changes ### `EnsureRequirements` rule (new) - Composes `EnforceDistribution::optimize()` + `EnforceSorting::optimize()` - Replaces both rules in the default optimizer chain - 53 comprehensive tests including idempotency verification ### Distribution-aware `pushdown_sorts` (fix) - Add `distribution_requirement` field to `ParentRequirements` - New `add_sort_above_with_distribution()` inserts `SortPreservingMergeExec` when parent requires `SinglePartition` and input has multiple partitions - Propagate distribution through recursion with `stronger_distribution()` - Reset distribution below partition-merging nodes (SPM, single-partition outputs) ### Fix `EnforceDistribution` fetch preservation (apache#14150) - `remove_dist_changing_operators()` now saves fetch from removed SPM/Coalesce - `add_merge_on_top()` re-applies saved fetch to new operators ## Testing | Suite | Result | |-------|--------| | EnsureRequirements (new) | 53 passed | | enforce_sorting (existing) | 124 passed, 0 regressions | | enforce_distribution (existing) | 66 passed, 0 regressions | | SLT (465 files) | 1 pre-existing failure only | | **Total** | **243 unit + 464 SLT, 0 new failures** | Idempotency verified: - All partition counts 1-64 - Triple + 10x consecutive optimization passes - SortMergeJoin, HashJoin, Window, Aggregate topologies - PR apache#53/apache#54 regression scenarios - apache#14150 fetch preservation across passes Closes: apache#14150 Part of: apache#21973
zhuqi-lucas
added a commit
to zhuqi-lucas/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ceSorting ## Summary Replace the separate `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` optimizer rules with a single `EnsureRequirements` rule in the default optimizer chain. This makes the composition idempotent by fixing distribution-awareness in `pushdown_sorts` and fetch preservation in `EnforceDistribution`. ## Problem `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` are coupled through `SortExec.preserve_partitioning` but run as independent rules. This caused: 1. **Production 502 errors**: `pushdown_sorts` set `preserve_partitioning=true` without `SortPreservingMergeExec`, violating `SinglePartition` requirements from `GlobalLimitExec` → `SanityCheckPlan` failure. 2. **Non-idempotent composition**: Running the rules multiple times produced different (sometimes invalid) plans. 3. **Lost fetch values** (apache#14150): `EnforceDistribution` dropped `fetch` from `SortPreservingMergeExec` when stripping and re-adding distribution operators. DataFusion was the only major engine with separate rules — Spark (`EnsureRequirements`) and Presto (`AddExchanges`) use a single rule. ## Changes ### `EnsureRequirements` rule (new) - Composes `EnforceDistribution::optimize()` + `EnforceSorting::optimize()` - Replaces both rules in the default optimizer chain - 53 comprehensive tests including idempotency verification ### Distribution-aware `pushdown_sorts` (fix) - Add `distribution_requirement` field to `ParentRequirements` - New `add_sort_above_with_distribution()` inserts `SortPreservingMergeExec` when parent requires `SinglePartition` and input has multiple partitions - Propagate distribution through recursion with `stronger_distribution()` - Reset distribution below partition-merging nodes (SPM, single-partition outputs) ### Fix `EnforceDistribution` fetch preservation (apache#14150) - `remove_dist_changing_operators()` now saves fetch from removed SPM/Coalesce - `add_merge_on_top()` re-applies saved fetch to new operators ## Testing | Suite | Result | |-------|--------| | EnsureRequirements (new) | 53 passed | | enforce_sorting (existing) | 124 passed, 0 regressions | | enforce_distribution (existing) | 66 passed, 0 regressions | | SLT (465 files) | 1 pre-existing failure only | | **Total** | **243 unit + 464 SLT, 0 new failures** | Idempotency verified: - All partition counts 1-64 - Triple + 10x consecutive optimization passes - SortMergeJoin, HashJoin, Window, Aggregate topologies - PR apache#53/apache#54 regression scenarios - apache#14150 fetch preservation across passes Closes: apache#14150 Part of: apache#21973
zhuqi-lucas
added a commit
to zhuqi-lucas/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2026
…ceSorting ## Summary Replace the separate `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` optimizer rules with a single `EnsureRequirements` rule in the default optimizer chain. This makes the composition idempotent by fixing distribution-awareness in `pushdown_sorts` and fetch preservation in `EnforceDistribution`. ## Problem `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` are coupled through `SortExec.preserve_partitioning` but run as independent rules. This caused: 1. **Production 502 errors**: `pushdown_sorts` set `preserve_partitioning=true` without `SortPreservingMergeExec`, violating `SinglePartition` requirements from `GlobalLimitExec` → `SanityCheckPlan` failure. 2. **Non-idempotent composition**: Running the rules multiple times produced different (sometimes invalid) plans. 3. **Lost fetch values** (apache#14150): `EnforceDistribution` dropped `fetch` from `SortPreservingMergeExec` when stripping and re-adding distribution operators. DataFusion was the only major engine with separate rules — Spark (`EnsureRequirements`) and Presto (`AddExchanges`) use a single rule. ## Changes ### `EnsureRequirements` rule (new) - Composes `EnforceDistribution::optimize()` + `EnforceSorting::optimize()` - Replaces both rules in the default optimizer chain - 53 comprehensive tests including idempotency verification ### Distribution-aware `pushdown_sorts` (fix) - Add `distribution_requirement` field to `ParentRequirements` - New `add_sort_above_with_distribution()` inserts `SortPreservingMergeExec` when parent requires `SinglePartition` and input has multiple partitions - Propagate distribution through recursion with `stronger_distribution()` - Reset distribution below partition-merging nodes (SPM, single-partition outputs) ### Fix `EnforceDistribution` fetch preservation (apache#14150) - `remove_dist_changing_operators()` now saves fetch from removed SPM/Coalesce - `add_merge_on_top()` re-applies saved fetch to new operators ## Testing | Suite | Result | |-------|--------| | EnsureRequirements (new) | 53 passed | | enforce_sorting (existing) | 124 passed, 0 regressions | | enforce_distribution (existing) | 66 passed, 0 regressions | | SLT (465 files) | 1 pre-existing failure only | | **Total** | **243 unit + 464 SLT, 0 new failures** | Idempotency verified: - All partition counts 1-64 - Triple + 10x consecutive optimization passes - SortMergeJoin, HashJoin, Window, Aggregate topologies - PR apache#53/apache#54 regression scenarios - apache#14150 fetch preservation across passes Closes: apache#14150 Part of: apache#21973
zhuqi-lucas
added a commit
to zhuqi-lucas/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2026
…ceSorting ## Summary Replace the separate `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` optimizer rules with a single `EnsureRequirements` rule in the default optimizer chain. This makes the composition idempotent by fixing distribution-awareness in `pushdown_sorts` and fetch preservation in `EnforceDistribution`. ## Problem `EnforceDistribution` and `EnforceSorting` are coupled through `SortExec.preserve_partitioning` but run as independent rules. This caused: 1. **Production 502 errors**: `pushdown_sorts` set `preserve_partitioning=true` without `SortPreservingMergeExec`, violating `SinglePartition` requirements from `GlobalLimitExec` → `SanityCheckPlan` failure. 2. **Non-idempotent composition**: Running the rules multiple times produced different (sometimes invalid) plans. 3. **Lost fetch values** (apache#14150): `EnforceDistribution` dropped `fetch` from `SortPreservingMergeExec` when stripping and re-adding distribution operators. DataFusion was the only major engine with separate rules — Spark (`EnsureRequirements`) and Presto (`AddExchanges`) use a single rule. ## Changes ### `EnsureRequirements` rule (new) - Composes `EnforceDistribution::optimize()` + `EnforceSorting::optimize()` - Replaces both rules in the default optimizer chain - 53 comprehensive tests including idempotency verification ### Distribution-aware `pushdown_sorts` (fix) - Add `distribution_requirement` field to `ParentRequirements` - New `add_sort_above_with_distribution()` inserts `SortPreservingMergeExec` when parent requires `SinglePartition` and input has multiple partitions - Propagate distribution through recursion with `stronger_distribution()` - Reset distribution below partition-merging nodes (SPM, single-partition outputs) ### Fix `EnforceDistribution` fetch preservation (apache#14150) - `remove_dist_changing_operators()` now saves fetch from removed SPM/Coalesce - `add_merge_on_top()` re-applies saved fetch to new operators ## Testing | Suite | Result | |-------|--------| | EnsureRequirements (new) | 53 passed | | enforce_sorting (existing) | 124 passed, 0 regressions | | enforce_distribution (existing) | 66 passed, 0 regressions | | SLT (465 files) | 1 pre-existing failure only | | **Total** | **243 unit + 464 SLT, 0 new failures** | Idempotency verified: - All partition counts 1-64 - Triple + 10x consecutive optimization passes - SortMergeJoin, HashJoin, Window, Aggregate topologies - PR apache#53/apache#54 regression scenarios - apache#14150 fetch preservation across passes Closes: apache#14150 Part of: apache#21973
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.
Migrate from apache/arrow#10066.
Which issue does this PR close?
Close Jira issue ARROW-12306. Closes #198
Rationale for this change
Let CsvFile and CsvExec support reading from a reader (not only files)
What changes are included in this PR?
This pr adds the following new pub functions:
CsvFile::try_new_from_readerCsvFile::try_new_from_reader_infer_schemaCsvExec::try_new_from_readerCsvStream::try_new_from_readerAre there any user-facing changes?
No.