Change FieldSummary {upper,lower}_bound to ByteBuf
#1369
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Fokko
force-pushed
the
fd-change-datum-into-bytes
branch
2 times, most recently
from
62dcdd3 to
601ef29
Compare
Fokko
force-pushed
the
fd-change-datum-into-bytes
branch
from
601ef29 to
1da092a
Compare
Fokko
force-pushed
the
fd-change-datum-into-bytes
branch
2 times, most recently
from
bd4691f to
d215831
Compare
Fokko
force-pushed
the
fd-change-datum-into-bytes
branch
from
d215831 to
ccd4632
Compare
Xuanwo
reviewed
May 23, 2025
| Some(bound) if datum <= bound => ROWS_CANNOT_MATCH, | ||
| Some(_) => ROWS_MIGHT_MATCH, | ||
| Some(bound_bytes) => { | ||
| let bound = ManifestFilterVisitor::bytes_to_datum( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@liurenjie1024 what's the cost of datum_from_bytes and bytes_to_datum? Do we need to introduce a new type in between?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The cost dependends on the type, but I think it's fine for now since it's not supposed to be quite expensive.
kevinjqliu
reviewed
May 24, 2025
| @@ -577,7 +575,7 @@ pub struct ManifestFile { | |||
| /// A list of field summaries for each partition field in the spec. Each | |||
| /// field in the list corresponds to a field in the manifest file’s | |||
| /// partition spec. | |||
| pub partitions: Vec<FieldSummary>, | |||
| pub partitions: Option<Vec<FieldSummary>>, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i like this change, it aligns with the spec definition
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is also a slight semantic difference; when it is omitted, we don't know anything about the partitions. When it is an empty Vec, then it indicates that it is unpartitioned.
| @@ -414,6 +444,11 @@ impl ManifestFilterVisitor<'_> { | |||
| }; | |||
| Ok(bound) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| fn bytes_to_datum(bytes: &ByteBuf, t: Type) -> Datum { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit should this be in Datum alongside try_from_bytes?
Co-authored-by: Kevin Liu <kevinjqliu@users.noreply.github.com>
Xuanwo
approved these changes
May 28, 2025
liurenjie1024
approved these changes
May 28, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
I would like to invite everyone to roast my Rust-skills in order for me to improve myself :)
Unblocks #1328
This aligns closely with PyIceberg and Java and greatly simplifies the use of the Avro readers in PyIceberg. Otherwise, we would need to update public APIs.
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?