-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 965
Revert "Improve coalesce
and concat
performance for views (#7614)"
#7623
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.
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
Revert "Improve coalesce
and concat
performance for views (#7614)"
#7623
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @Dandandan
if keep_views { | ||
self.views_buffer.extend_from_slice(array.views()); | ||
} else { | ||
let starting_buffer = self.completed.len() as u32; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think one bug is that this starting buffer value should be calculated before extending self.completed
a few lines above
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah
if keep_views { | ||
self.views_buffer.extend_from_slice(array.views()); | ||
} else { | ||
let starting_buffer = self.completed.len() as u32; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm - this seems off as we already pushed to self.completed
@alamb (I only have time later today to address)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll make some new tests / etc to try and cover this case
Let's revert it to be safe, and we can re-create a new PR with some more testing |
…apache#7614)" (apache#7623)" This reverts commit da461c8.
#7625) … (#7614)" (#7623)" This reverts commit da461c8. This adds a test and fix for the wrong index issue. I also verified the change for DataFusion (and benchmarks show notable improvements). # Which issue does this PR close? Closes #NNN. # Rationale for this change # What changes are included in this PR? # Are there any user-facing changes?
# Which issue does this PR close? - Follow on to #7625 from @Dandandan # Rationale for this change I want to eventually remove `gc_string_view` but currently the unit tests are in terms of that function # What changes are included in this PR? Rewrite tests to be in terms of `coalesce` instead Also, 1. Add additional coverage for the issue we saw in #7623 2. Add add coverage for the case where there are data buffers in the view, but they are not referenced by any view #7625 (comment) Codecov of this module is now 100% # Are there any user-facing changes? If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please call them out.
This reverts commit 7739a83.
Which issue does this PR close?
Rationale for this change
I found this errors in DataFusion (see apache/datafusion#16249 (comment)), so let's revert it and find the error.
What changes are included in this PR?
Are there any user-facing changes?