Skip to content

Conversation

@andyedison
Copy link

Description

This PR is to address a query plan regression we observed when migrating from v20 to v21. It preserves literals within the simplifyPredicates function so that it doesn't break routing optimizations

Related Issue(s)

#18987

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

AI Disclosure

This PR was written with the assistance of GitHub Copilot and Claude Opus 4.5 to help identify where the bug could be in the plan parsing, as well as a fix. Executed within environments able to reproduce #18987

@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Dec 8, 2025

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Dec 8, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v24.0.0 milestone Dec 8, 2025
@andyedison
Copy link
Author

This code was added in #16689, which landed in v21 - the version in which we saw this query plan regression in #18987

@andyedison
Copy link
Author

Still working on test(s) which is why the draft status

@andyedison
Copy link
Author

andyedison commented Dec 8, 2025

With this fix implemented on our repro fork https://github.com/andyedison/vitess/tree/v23-18987-repro

"Inputs": [
  {
    "OperatorType": "Route",
    "Variant": "None",
    "Keyspace": {
      "Name": "foobar_ks",
      "Sharded": true
    },
    "FieldQuery": "select id, subquery_for_limit.updated_at from (select foobar.id, foobar.updated_at from foobar where 1 != 1) as subquery_for_limit where 1 != 1",
    "OrderBy": "1 DESC",
    "Query": "select id, subquery_for_limit.updated_at from (select foobar.id, foobar.updated_at from foobar where 0) as subquery_for_limit order by subquery_for_limit.updated_at desc limit 100"
  }
]
v23-18987-repro ⇡1 !1 ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── ✔  5s   23:27:04  
╰─ git --no-pager show                                                     
commit ed3e1ab971e01c09a10c7b55f199d0d9fdb4403f (HEAD -> v23-18987-repro)
Author: Andy Edison <[email protected]>
Date:   Sun Dec 7 23:25:53 2025 -0600

    Proposed fix 1897

diff --git a/go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/expressions.go b/go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/expressions.go
index f42ec87404..1309e4cc32 100644
--- a/go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/expressions.go
+++ b/go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/expressions.go
@@ -114,7 +114,20 @@ func simplifyPredicates(ctx *plancontext.PlanningContext, in sqlparser.Expr) sql
                        replace = nil
                }
        }
-       output := sqlparser.CopyOnRewrite(in, pre, post, ctx.SemTable.CopySemanticInfo).(sqlparser.Expr)
+       // Custom clone function for CopyOnRewrite that preserves correct constant detection.
+       // When we replace complex expressions with constant literals during simplification,
+       // we intentionally skip copying semantic info (like table dependencies). For example,
+       // when "col = 1 AND 1 = 0" simplifies to "0", the "0" must not inherit dependencies
+       // from "col". Otherwise, IsConstantBool won't recognize it as constant, breaking
+       // routing optimization.
+       cloned := func(from, to sqlparser.SQLNode) {
+               // Don't copy semantic info if the replacement is a constant literal
+               if _, isLiteral := to.(*sqlparser.Literal); isLiteral {
+                       return
+               }
+               ctx.SemTable.CopySemanticInfo(from, to)
+       }
+       output := sqlparser.CopyOnRewrite(in, pre, post, cloned).(sqlparser.Expr)
        if in != output {
                // we need to do this, since one simplification might lead to another
                return simplifyPredicates(ctx, output)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 8, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 80.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (main@3dd1516). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
go/vt/vtgate/planbuilder/operators/expressions.go 80.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #19002   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   69.81%           
=======================================
  Files           ?     1610           
  Lines           ?   215353           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?   150338           
  Misses          ?    65015           
  Partials        ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@andyedison
Copy link
Author

closing in favor of #19003

@andyedison andyedison closed this Dec 8, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant