Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

HPCC-31584 Add ECL Record information to Parquet #18514

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 11, 2024
Merged

HPCC-31584 Add ECL Record information to Parquet #18514

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 11, 2024

Conversation

jackdelv
Copy link
Contributor

@jackdelv jackdelv commented Apr 9, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Type of change:

  • This change is a bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
  • This change is a new feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
  • This change improves the code (refactor or other change that does not change the functionality)
  • This change fixes warnings (the fix does not alter the functionality or the generated code)
  • This change is a breaking change (fix or feature that will cause existing behavior to change).
  • This change alters the query API (existing queries will have to be recompiled)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
    • My code does not create any new warnings from compiler, build system, or lint.
  • The commit message is properly formatted and free of typos.
    • The commit message title makes sense in a changelog, by itself.
    • The commit is signed.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
    • I have updated the documentation accordingly, or...
    • I have created a JIRA ticket to update the documentation.
    • Any new interfaces or exported functions are appropriately commented.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTORS document.
  • The change has been fully tested:
    • I have added tests to cover my changes.
    • All new and existing tests passed.
    • I have checked that this change does not introduce memory leaks.
    • I have used Valgrind or similar tools to check for potential issues.
  • I have given due consideration to all of the following potential concerns:
    • Scalability
    • Performance
    • Security
    • Thread-safety
    • Cloud-compatibility
    • Premature optimization
    • Existing deployed queries will not be broken
    • This change fixes the problem, not just the symptom
    • The target branch of this pull request is appropriate for such a change.
  • There are no similar instances of the same problem that should be addressed
    • I have addressed them here
    • I have raised JIRA issues to address them separately
  • This is a user interface / front-end modification
    • I have tested my changes in multiple modern browsers
    • The component(s) render as expected

Smoketest:

  • Send notifications about my Pull Request position in Smoketest queue.
  • Test my draft Pull Request.

Testing:

@jackdelv jackdelv requested review from ghalliday and dcamper April 9, 2024 13:34
@jackdelv jackdelv changed the base branch from master to candidate-9.6.x April 9, 2024 13:36
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 9, 2024

Jira Issue: https://hpccsystems.atlassian.net//browse/HPCC-31584

Jirabot Action Result:
Workflow Transition: Merge Pending
Updated PR

dcamper
dcamper reviewed Apr 9, 2024
View reviewed changes
plugins/parquet/parquetembed.cpp
* @param currTable The index of the Table to read columns from.
* @return __int64 The number of rows in the current Table.
*/
__int64 ParquetReader::readColumns(__int64 currTable)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a public method but relies on expectedRecord to be non-null to avoid crashing. The one caller of this function in this class does check for that, but since the method is public it could be called from elsewhere. Is this a concern? Should the method be protected or private instead?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's not a concern at the moment because it is only called in one place. I think it would be best to make the method private because it probably won't ever need to be called outside of that one codepath where expectedRecord is used to decide which method to call for reading the columns.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There were some additional methods that should not be called anywhere else. I have made them private as well.

@jackdelv jackdelv requested a review from dcamper April 9, 2024 19:53
dcamper
dcamper approved these changes Apr 9, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dcamper dcamper left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

ghalliday
ghalliday reviewed Apr 10, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ghalliday ghalliday left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One question. Also, probably needs to be merged after your other change has been upmerged.

plugins/parquet/parquetembed.cpp
@@ -293,6 +321,7 @@ std::shared_ptr<parquet::arrow::RowGroupReader> ParquetReader::queryCurrentTable
tables += fileTableCounts[i];
if (currTable < tables)
{
currentTableMetadata = parquetFileReaders[i]->parquet_reader()->metadata()->Subset({static_cast<int>(currTable - offset)});
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Question: Does this assume that a subset of the data is always the leading fields? I couldn't find the documentation.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure what you mean by leading fields, but the field information for each subset should be the same. The only thing that could change is the number of rows in the RowGroup.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

oh ok. That makes sense.

@jackdelv jackdelv requested a review from ghalliday April 10, 2024 19:41
ghalliday
ghalliday approved these changes Apr 11, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ghalliday ghalliday left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jackdelv please squash

@jackdelv jackdelv force-pushed the ParquetWithRtlRecordInfo branch from 99e8033 to 174f8ea Compare April 11, 2024 11:34
@jackdelv
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ghalliday Squashed.

@ghalliday ghalliday merged commit d32574d into hpcc-systems:candidate-9.6.x Apr 11, 2024
49 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dcamper dcamper dcamper approved these changes

@ghalliday ghalliday ghalliday approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@jackdelv @ghalliday @dcamper