Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
[fix](predicate) Avoid recomputing predicates - #60484
Conversation
Thearas
commented
Feb 4, 2026
Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris. Please clearly describe your PR:
|
Gabriel39
commented
Feb 4, 2026
run buildall |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 31267 ms |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 28.22 s |
Gabriel39
commented
Feb 4, 2026
run buildall |
Gabriel39
commented
Feb 4, 2026
run buildall |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 31183 ms |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 28.28 s |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
BE UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage Increment coverage report
|
Gabriel39
commented
Feb 4, 2026
run buildall |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 32253 ms |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 28.54 s |
hello-stephen
commented
Feb 4, 2026
BE UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage Increment coverage report
|
hello-stephen
commented
Feb 4, 2026
BE Regression && UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage Increment coverage report
|
Gabriel39
commented
Feb 4, 2026
run buildall |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
TPC-H: Total hot run time: 31317 ms |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
ClickBench: Total hot run time: 28.35 s |
doris-robot
commented
Feb 4, 2026
BE UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage Increment coverage report
|
hello-stephen
commented
Feb 4, 2026
BE Regression && UT Coverage ReportIncrement line coverage Increment coverage report
|
shuke987
commented
Feb 5, 2026
skip buildall |
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
apache#60514) Cherry-picked from apache#60484 Co-authored-by: Gabriel <liwenqiang@selectdb.com>
…s a scope range ### What problem does this PR solve? Issue Number: close #xxx Related PR: #xxx Problem Summary: Commit d7153c0 ("[fix](predicate) Avoid recomputing predicates (apache#60484)") introduced a regression where IN_LIST predicates from IN_FILTER runtime filters are incorrectly erased during key range construction in _build_key_ranges_and_filters(). When both MINMAX and IN runtime filters target the same key column, and the IN filter value count exceeds max_pushdown_conditions_per_column, the IN values are not absorbed into the ColumnValueRange (which remains a scope range from MINMAX). However, the erase logic treated the scope range as "exact" and removed all could_be_erased() predicates including the IN_LIST predicate. This caused the IN_LIST to never reach the storage layer for row-level filtering, resulting in significant performance degradation. The fix preserves IN_LIST predicates when the ColumnValueRange is a scope range (not a fixed value range), since scope ranges do not capture IN_LIST filtering semantics. Additionally, the PushDownPredicates profile string is now re-printed after _build_key_ranges_and_filters() to accurately reflect which predicates actually reach the storage layer. ### Release note Fixed a performance regression where IN_LIST runtime filter predicates were incorrectly erased when a MINMAX runtime filter created a scope range on the same key column, causing the IN filter to have no effect on row filtering. ### Check List (For Author) - Test: Regression test - Regression test: test_rf_in_list_not_erased_by_scope_range - Behavior changed: No - Does this need documentation: No
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #xxx
Related PR: #xxx
Problem Summary:
Release note
None
Check List (For Author)
Test
Behavior changed:
Does this need documentation?
Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)