feat: optimizer rule for windowed sort

[waynexia]

I hereby agree to the terms of the GreptimeDB CLA.

Refer to a related PR or issue link (optional)

What's changed and what's your intention?

Adds a new optimizer rule to handle windowed sorts.

Before:

explain analyze select * from xxx order by ts limit 1;

|     0 |    0 |  MergeScanExec: peers=[4398046511104(1024, 0), ] metrics=[output_rows: 1, greptime_exec_read_cost: 0, ready_time: 10060933, first_consume_time: 27928469508, finish_time: 27935945806, ]
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
|     1 |    0 |  GlobalLimitExec: skip=0, fetch=1 metrics=[output_rows: 1, elapsed_compute: 35178, ]
  SortPreservingMergeExec: [timestamp@9 ASC NULLS LAST] metrics=[output_rows: 16, elapsed_compute: 26392, ]
    SortExec: TopK(fetch=1), expr=[timestamp@9 ASC NULLS LAST], preserve_partitioning=[true] metrics=[output_rows: 16, elapsed_compute: 18577898198, row_replacements: 98, ]
      UnorderedScan: region=4398046511104(1024, 0), partition_count=0 (0 memtable ranges, 0 file 0 ranges) metrics=[output_rows: 806097407, mem_used: 211645809179, elapsed_poll: 358804887399, elapsed_await: 423133641911, ]
 |
|  NULL | NULL | Total rows: 1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |

3 rows in set (27.99 sec)

After

|     0 |    0 |  MergeScanExec: peers=[4398046511104(1024, 0), ] metrics=[output_rows: 1, greptime_exec_read_cost: 0, first_consume_time: 3913059830, ready_time: 35493492, finish_time: 3913469912, ]
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |
|     1 |    0 |  GlobalLimitExec: skip=0, fetch=1 metrics=[output_rows: 1, elapsed_compute: 17285963, ]
  SortPreservingMergeExec: [timestamp@9 ASC NULLS LAST] metrics=[output_rows: 16, elapsed_compute: 69861, ]
    WindowedSortExec metrics=[output_rows: 16, elapsed_compute: 16, ]
      PartSortExec timestamp@9 ASC NULLS LAST metrics=[output_rows: 46274923, elapsed_compute: 16, ]
        UnorderedScan: region=4398046511104(1024, 0), partition_count=7883 (1 memtable ranges, 24 file 7882 ranges) metrics=[output_rows: 46274923, mem_used: 12144270581, elapsed_poll: 25761366240, elapsed_await: 30407342778, ]
 |
|  NULL | NULL | Total rows: 1                                                                                                                                                           

3 rows in set (3.93 sec)

Checklist

• I have written the necessary rustdoc comments.
• I have added the necessary unit tests and integration tests.
• This PR requires documentation updates.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 82.19424% with 99 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 83.95%. Comparing base (0ee455a) to head (2e2ae98).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4874      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.17%   83.95%   -0.22%     
==========================================
  Files        1136     1137       +1     
  Lines      208600   208997     +397     
==========================================
- Hits       175593   175470     -123     
- Misses      33007    33527     +520     

[evenyag]

Mostly LGTM

[evenyag]

non-blocking: We may refactor this to allow only modifying distinguish_partition_range so we don't have to clone the partition ranges.

[discord9]

others LGTM

[evenyag]

The cause of the failure of fuzz_insert_logical_table is that part sort always return the result of sort_buffer():

greptimedb/src/query/src/part_sort.rs

Lines 251 to 252 in eab9e3a

	// mark end of current PartitionRange
	return Poll::Ready(self.sort_buffer().transpose());

If there is an empty PartitionRange, the part sort stream will complete immediately and won't poll the remaining PartRanges. 7baf4ad fixed this.

TODO: Maybe we should add a test case to part_sort.rs

[discord9]

tests added in part_sort.rs and window_sort.rs, also update window_sort's input invariant, a pyo3 ut fail cause coverage to fail will be fixed by #4894