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

[Enhancement] Use more clear type description in ParquetField (backport #52575) #52615

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[Enhancement] Use more clear type description in ParquetField (backport #52575) #52615

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

mergify[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot commented Nov 5, 2024 •
edited by wanpengfei-git
Loading

Why I'm doing:

In the previous code, we used TypeDescriptor to represent type in ParquetField.

But actually, we will only set TypeDescriptor when ParquetField is a complex type, for scalar type, we will set a random value for it. it will easily mislead programmers.

What I'm doing:

Use a more strict type ColumnType to replace TypeDescriptor.

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

Bugfix cherry-pick branch check:

  • I have checked the version labels which the pr will be auto-backported to the target branch
    • 3.3
    • 3.2
    • 3.1
    • 3.0
    • 2.5
This is an automatic backport of pull request #52575 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com). ## Why I'm doing: In the previous code, we used TypeDescriptor to represent type in ParquetField.

But actually, we will only set TypeDescriptor when ParquetField is a complex type, for scalar type, we will set a random value for it. it will easily mislead programmers.

What I'm doing:

Use a more strict type ColumnType to replace TypeDescriptor.

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

@Smith-Cruise @mergify
[Enhancement] Use more clear type description in ParquetField (#52575)
19b62dc 
Signed-off-by: Smith Cruise <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 1028b6a)

# Conflicts:
#	be/src/formats/parquet/column_reader.cpp
#	be/src/formats/parquet/group_reader.cpp
#	be/src/formats/parquet/meta_helper.cpp
#	be/src/formats/parquet/schema.cpp
#	be/test/formats/parquet/group_reader_test.cpp
@mergify mergify bot added the conflicts label Nov 5, 2024
@mergify Mergify
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Nov 5, 2024

Cherry-pick of 1028b6a has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/branch-3.2/pr-52575
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/branch-3.2'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit 1028b6ac2c.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Changes to be committed:
	modified:   be/src/formats/parquet/schema.h
	modified:   be/src/util/system_metrics.cpp
	modified:   be/test/formats/parquet/parquet_cli_reader.h
	modified:   be/test/formats/parquet/parquet_schema_test.cpp

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   be/src/formats/parquet/column_reader.cpp
	both modified:   be/src/formats/parquet/group_reader.cpp
	both modified:   be/src/formats/parquet/meta_helper.cpp
	both modified:   be/src/formats/parquet/schema.cpp
	both modified:   be/test/formats/parquet/group_reader_test.cpp

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

@mergify mergify bot mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2024
Merged
24 tasks
@mergify Mergify
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Nov 5, 2024

@mergify[bot]: Backport conflict, please reslove the conflict and resubmit the pr

@mergify mergify bot closed this Nov 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@Smith-Cruise Smith-Cruise

Labels
automerge conflicts
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@Smith-Cruise