fix: avoid double-take in some scenarios #3357
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The code was a little over-eager with regards to eager materialization. I think this was just a mistake from a recent refactor. This led to a double-take (also in the code). In most cases this double-take would be smoothed out by the double-take reducing optimization step. However, in some cases (e.g. if there was a limit between the takes) the takes weren't being combined.
We could improve the double-take optimization step to pushdown through a limit node but it was an easier to fix to avoid accidentally generating the double-take in the first place.
I added a test case for this in test_plans although that test case highlights another interesting optimization we could apply which is to push limits down into vector searches.