<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: How to read and optimize Physical plans in Spark to optimize for TBs and PBs of data workflows in Data Engineering</title>
    <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151542#M53659</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Greetings&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.databricks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/221485"&gt;@praveenm00&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;,&amp;nbsp; good question, and you're right that AQE handles a lot automatically. But understanding physical plans is still worth the investment, especially at TB/PB scale, because AQE works within constraints. It can't fix a bad query structure, misconfigured settings, or unnecessary shuffles baked into your data model. The plan tells you what Spark actually decided to do, which is where any real tuning starts.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;How to read the plan:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Use EXPLAIN in SQL or .explain() on a DataFrame. The variants worth knowing:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;EXPLAIN EXTENDED -- shows parsed, analyzed, optimized, and physical plans&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;EXPLAIN FORMATTED -- cleaner output, easier to navigate&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;EXPLAIN CODEGEN -- generated code, useful for CPU-level tuning&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Read bottom-up. Data flows from the leaf nodes (scans) upward through transformations to the final output.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What to look for at scale:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Exchanges (shuffles) -- the most expensive operations. Every ShuffleExchange node is worth questioning. Can it be avoided with better partitioning or bucketing?&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Join strategy -- SortMergeJoin is common but expensive. AQE can promote to BroadcastHashJoin at runtime if one side is small enough, but you can also force it with spark.sql.autoBroadcastJoinThreshold.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Scan-to-output ratio -- if you're scanning 10B rows and keeping 1M, you want those filters pushed down or your data repartitioned.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Partition count -- too few means skew and OOM risk, too many means scheduling overhead. AQE coalesces at runtime, but the starting point still matters.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Skew detection -- look for SortMergeJoin on high-cardinality keys and confirm that spark.sql.adaptive.skewJoin.enabled is actually triggering, not just enabled.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Resources worth checking:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Databricks docs on AQE -- covers what it handles and what it doesn't&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;The Spark UI SQL tab -- the visual DAG is much easier to navigate than raw EXPLAIN output&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;"High Performance Spark" by Holden Karau -- still the best deep dive on this&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The short version: AQE is a safety net, not a substitute for understanding what your query is doing. At scale, the difference between a 20-minute job and a 2-hour job often comes down to one bad exchange or a skew case that AQE didn't catch. That's exactly the skill that interviewer was testing for.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps you, Louis.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2026 17:59:23 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Louis_Frolio</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2026-03-20T17:59:23Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>How to read and optimize Physical plans in Spark to optimize for TBs and PBs of data workflows</title>
      <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151473#M53652</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;One of the Amazon interviews I attended, which was for a Big data engineer asked me for this particular skill of reading and understanding physical plans in spark to optimize MASSIVE dataloads. But I though spark automatically does all these optimizations on its own with respect to optimizing plans using Adaptive query execution. Am I missing something? If so, how do I address this? Great if you folks had experience on the same and could share me some best resources.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2026 04:07:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151473#M53652</guid>
      <dc:creator>praveenm00</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-03-20T04:07:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: How to read and optimize Physical plans in Spark to optimize for TBs and PBs of data workflows</title>
      <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151477#M53653</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes! AQE helps, but it does not remove the need to read physical plans. In Databricks, the practical skill is to use the plan to spot data movement, skew, sort-merge joins, and unnecessary shuffles, then decide whether to change partitioning, file layout, or join strategy; AQE and Photon can help automatically, but they still work within the shape of the query you give them.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Say in interviews&lt;BR /&gt;“I use the physical plan to find bottlenecks, then tune the data layout and query shape so Spark can execute efficiently at TB/PB scale.” AQE re-optimizes during execution based on runtime stats, but it cannot fully fix bad table design, extreme skew, or a query that reads too much data in the first place.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Short resources&lt;BR /&gt;For practical reading, start with &lt;A href="https://docs.databricks.com/aws/en/optimizations/aqe" target="_self"&gt;Databricks AQE docs&lt;/A&gt;, &lt;A href="https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/sql-performance-tuning.html" target="_self"&gt;Spark SQL tuning docs&lt;/A&gt;, and &lt;A href="https://docs.databricks.com/aws/en/compute/photon" target="_self"&gt;Databricks docs on Photon&lt;/A&gt; and &lt;A href="https://docs.databricks.com/aws/en/ldp/unity-catalog" target="_self"&gt;Unity Catalog pipelines&lt;/A&gt;; those cover the exact runtime behavior you’d discuss in interviews.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2026 05:05:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151477#M53653</guid>
      <dc:creator>suranga</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-03-20T05:05:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: How to read and optimize Physical plans in Spark to optimize for TBs and PBs of data workflows</title>
      <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151493#M53654</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;To handle PB-scale data, the most common "killer" is Data Skew. This happens when one join key (like a null value or a "Power User" ID) has millions of rows while others have only a few.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Even with Spark’s optimization, one executor will get buried while the others sit idle. The solution is Salting.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. The Problem: Standard Join&lt;BR /&gt;In a standard join, Spark hashes the join key. If ID: 101 appears 1 billion times, all those rows go to one partition.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. The Fix: Salting Technique&lt;BR /&gt;We manually break the "heavy" key into smaller pieces by adding a random "salt" (a suffix).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2026 06:43:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151493#M53654</guid>
      <dc:creator>SudhansuPatra</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-03-20T06:43:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: How to read and optimize Physical plans in Spark to optimize for TBs and PBs of data workflows</title>
      <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151542#M53659</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Greetings&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.databricks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/221485"&gt;@praveenm00&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;,&amp;nbsp; good question, and you're right that AQE handles a lot automatically. But understanding physical plans is still worth the investment, especially at TB/PB scale, because AQE works within constraints. It can't fix a bad query structure, misconfigured settings, or unnecessary shuffles baked into your data model. The plan tells you what Spark actually decided to do, which is where any real tuning starts.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;How to read the plan:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Use EXPLAIN in SQL or .explain() on a DataFrame. The variants worth knowing:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;EXPLAIN EXTENDED -- shows parsed, analyzed, optimized, and physical plans&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;EXPLAIN FORMATTED -- cleaner output, easier to navigate&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;EXPLAIN CODEGEN -- generated code, useful for CPU-level tuning&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Read bottom-up. Data flows from the leaf nodes (scans) upward through transformations to the final output.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What to look for at scale:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Exchanges (shuffles) -- the most expensive operations. Every ShuffleExchange node is worth questioning. Can it be avoided with better partitioning or bucketing?&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Join strategy -- SortMergeJoin is common but expensive. AQE can promote to BroadcastHashJoin at runtime if one side is small enough, but you can also force it with spark.sql.autoBroadcastJoinThreshold.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Scan-to-output ratio -- if you're scanning 10B rows and keeping 1M, you want those filters pushed down or your data repartitioned.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Partition count -- too few means skew and OOM risk, too many means scheduling overhead. AQE coalesces at runtime, but the starting point still matters.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Skew detection -- look for SortMergeJoin on high-cardinality keys and confirm that spark.sql.adaptive.skewJoin.enabled is actually triggering, not just enabled.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Resources worth checking:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Databricks docs on AQE -- covers what it handles and what it doesn't&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;The Spark UI SQL tab -- the visual DAG is much easier to navigate than raw EXPLAIN output&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;"High Performance Spark" by Holden Karau -- still the best deep dive on this&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The short version: AQE is a safety net, not a substitute for understanding what your query is doing. At scale, the difference between a 20-minute job and a 2-hour job often comes down to one bad exchange or a skew case that AQE didn't catch. That's exactly the skill that interviewer was testing for.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps you, Louis.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2026 17:59:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/how-to-read-and-optimize-physical-plans-in-spark-to-optimize-for/m-p/151542#M53659</guid>
      <dc:creator>Louis_Frolio</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-03-20T17:59:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

