<!--
Thanks for sending a pull request!
Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines: https://kyuubi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/community/contributions.html
2. If the PR is related to an issue in https://github.com/apache/incubator-kyuubi/issues, add '[KYUUBI #XXXX]' in your PR title, e.g., '[KYUUBI #XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g., '[WIP][KYUUBI #XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
-->
### _Why are the changes needed?_
<!--
Please clarify why the changes are needed. For instance,
1. If you add a feature, you can talk about the use case of it.
2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
-->
Support `Union` case as below
```
SELECT * FROM t1
UNION [ALL]
SELECT * FROM t2
```
Support `Distinct` case as below
```
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM t1
```
Fix The bug of watchdog with maxOutputRows happens in this situation as below
Having and Sort
```
SELECT c1, COUNT(c2) AS cnt
FROM t1
GROUP BY c1
HAVING cnt > 0
[ORDER BY c1, [c2 ...]]
```
It throws Exception as
```
org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.GlobalLimit cannot be cast to org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.Aggregate
java.lang.ClassCastException: org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.GlobalLimit cannot be cast to org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.Aggregate
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveAggregateFunctions$.resolvedAggregateFilter$1(Analyzer.scala:2451)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveAggregateFunctions$.resolveFilterCondInAggregate(Analyzer.scala:2460)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveAggregateFunctions$.resolveHaving(Analyzer.scala:2496)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveAggregateFunctions$$anonfun$apply$21.applyOrElse(Analyzer.scala:2353)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveAggregateFunctions$$anonfun$apply$21.applyOrElse(Analyzer.scala:2345)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.AnalysisHelper.$anonfun$resolveOperatorsUp$3(AnalysisHelper.scala:90)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.trees.CurrentOrigin$.withOrigin(TreeNode.scala:74)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.AnalysisHelper.$anonfun$resolveOperatorsUp$1(AnalysisHelper.scala:90)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.AnalysisHelper$.allowInvokingTransformsInAnalyzer(AnalysisHelper.scala:221)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.AnalysisHelper.resolveOperatorsUp(AnalysisHelper.scala:86)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.AnalysisHelper.resolveOperatorsUp$(AnalysisHelper.scala:84)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.LogicalPlan.resolveOperatorsUp(LogicalPlan.scala:29)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveAggregateFunctions$.apply(Analyzer.scala:2345)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveAggregateFunctions$.apply(Analyzer.scala:2344)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.rules.RuleExecutor.$anonfun$execute$2(RuleExecutor.scala:216)
at scala.collection.LinearSeqOptimized.foldLeft(LinearSeqOptimized.scala:126)
at scala.collection.LinearSeqOptimized.foldLeft$(LinearSeqOptimized.scala:122)
at scala.collection.immutable.List.foldLeft(List.scala:91)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.rules.RuleExecutor.$anonfun$execute$1(RuleExecutor.scala:213)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.rules.RuleExecutor.$anonfun$execute$1$adapted(RuleExecutor.scala:205)
at scala.collection.immutable.List.foreach(List.scala:431)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.rules.RuleExecutor.execute(RuleExecutor.scala:205)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer.org$apache$spark$sql$catalyst$analysis$Analyzer$$executeSameContext(Analyzer.scala:196)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer.execute(Analyzer.scala:190)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer.execute(Analyzer.scala:155)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.rules.RuleExecutor.$anonfun$executeAndTrack$1(RuleExecutor.scala:183)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.QueryPlanningTracker$.withTracker(QueryPlanningTracker.scala:88)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.rules.RuleExecutor.executeAndTrack(RuleExecutor.scala:183)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer.$anonfun$executeAndCheck$1(Analyzer.scala:174)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.logical.AnalysisHelper$.markInAnalyzer(AnalysisHelper.scala:228)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer.executeAndCheck(Analyzer.scala:173)
at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.QueryExecution.$anonfun$analyzed$1(QueryExecution.scala:73)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.QueryPlanningTracker.measurePhase(QueryPlanningTracker.scala:111)
at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.QueryExecution.$anonfun$executePhase$1(QueryExecution.scala:143)
at org.apache.spark.sql.SparkSession.withActive(SparkSession.scala:775)
at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.QueryExecution.executePhase(QueryExecution.scala:143)
at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.QueryExecution.analyzed$lzycompute(QueryExecution.scala:73)
at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.QueryExecution.analyzed(QueryExecution.scala:71)
at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.QueryExecution.assertAnalyzed(QueryExecution.scala:63)
at org.apache.spark.sql.Dataset$.$anonfun$ofRows$2(Dataset.scala:98)
at org.apache.spark.sql.SparkSession.withActive(SparkSession.scala:775)
at org.apache.spark.sql.Dataset$.ofRows(Dataset.scala:96)
at org.apache.spark.sql.SparkSession.$anonfun$sql$1(SparkSession.scala:618)
at org.apache.spark.sql.SparkSession.withActive(SparkSession.scala:775)
at org.apache.spark.sql.SparkSession.sql(SparkSession.scala:613)
at org.apache.spark.sql.test.SQLTestUtilsBase.$anonfun$sql$1(SQLTestUtils.scala:231)
at org.apache.spark.sql.KyuubiExtensionSuite.$anonfun$new$55(KyuubiExtensionSuite.scala:1331)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.SQLHelper.withSQLConf(SQLHelper.scala:54)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.SQLHelper.withSQLConf$(SQLHelper.scala:38)
at
```
Reference related issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-31519
Spark SQL Ananlyzer transform aggregate with having to
```
Filter
+- Aggregate
```
Solution:
1. Skip the aggregate with havingCondition
2. Match Filter for Adding Limit
### _How was this patch tested?_
- [x] Add some test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive cases if possible
- [x] Add screenshots for manual tests if appropriate
<img width="1440" alt="截屏2021-09-21 下午8 35 16" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/635169/134171308-2842f0d4-acfa-4817-a03c-a7ef5e38df12.png">
- [x] [Run test](https://kyuubi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/develop_tools/testing.html#running-tests) locally before make a pull request
Closes#1129 from i7xh/fixAggWithHavingInMaxOutput.
Closes#1085
7577f4d3 [h] update
5955c89e [h] update
384b2333 [h] fix issue
5b0af156 [h] update
46327fc6 [h] Fix issue
6119a039 [h] fix issue
a7b87dd7 [h] Fix issue
2570444e [h] BugFix: Aggregate with having statement
Authored-by: h <h@zhihu.com>
Signed-off-by: ulysses-you <ulyssesyou@apache.org>
fdff2b6240
