Skip to content

Commit 46ac990

Browse files
authored
Wire up with_new_state with DataSource (#20718)
## Which issue does this PR close? <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123` indicates that this PR will close issue #123. --> - Closes #. ## Rationale for this change <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> `ExecutionPlan::with_new_state()` allows devs to inject custom information in their nodes that they can use for tweaking their `ExecutionPlan` implementations. This mechanism does not work today if the `ExecutionPlan` is a `DataSourceExec`, as this one does not implement the `with_new_state()` method from `ExecutionPlan`. In order to let people use this also for their own `DataSource` implementations, this PR adds this method to it. ## What changes are included in this PR? <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> Propagates `with_new_state()` to the `DataSource` trait, so that custom `DataSourceExec` can also benefit from it. ## Are these changes tested? <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? --> As it's just method plumbing, my impression is that having a test for it is overkill. ## Are there any user-facing changes? Users can now implement their `with_new_state()` also in `DataSource`, not only in `ExecutionPlan` <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. --> <!-- If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label. -->
1 parent 848cd63 commit 46ac990

1 file changed

Lines changed: 28 additions & 0 deletions

File tree

datafusion/datasource/src/source.rs

Lines changed: 28 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -228,6 +228,22 @@ pub trait DataSource: Send + Sync + Debug {
228228
&self,
229229
f: &mut dyn FnMut(&dyn PhysicalExpr) -> Result<TreeNodeRecursion>,
230230
) -> Result<TreeNodeRecursion>;
231+
232+
/// Injects arbitrary run-time state into this DataSource, returning a new instance
233+
/// that incorporates that state *if* it is relevant to the concrete DataSource implementation.
234+
///
235+
/// This is a generic entry point: the `state` can be any type wrapped in
236+
/// `Arc<dyn Any + Send + Sync>`. A data source that cares about the state should
237+
/// down-cast it to the concrete type it expects and, if successful, return a
238+
/// modified copy of itself that captures the provided value. If the state is
239+
/// not applicable, the default behaviour is to return `None` so that parent
240+
/// nodes can continue propagating the attempt further down the plan tree.
241+
fn with_new_state(
242+
&self,
243+
_state: Arc<dyn Any + Send + Sync>,
244+
) -> Option<Arc<dyn DataSource>> {
245+
None
246+
}
231247
}
232248

233249
/// [`ExecutionPlan`] that reads one or more files
@@ -432,6 +448,18 @@ impl ExecutionPlan for DataSourceExec {
432448
as Arc<dyn ExecutionPlan>
433449
})
434450
}
451+
452+
fn with_new_state(
453+
&self,
454+
state: Arc<dyn Any + Send + Sync>,
455+
) -> Option<Arc<dyn ExecutionPlan>> {
456+
self.data_source
457+
.with_new_state(state)
458+
.map(|new_data_source| {
459+
Arc::new(self.clone().with_data_source(new_data_source))
460+
as Arc<dyn ExecutionPlan>
461+
})
462+
}
435463
}
436464

437465
impl DataSourceExec {

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)