-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
GH-35421: [Go] Ensure interface contract between array.X.ValueStr & array.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString
#35457
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
GH-35421: [Go] Ensure interface contract between array.X.ValueStr & array.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString
#35457
Conversation
|
|
|
@zeroshade I see that some tests fail due to unavailability of generics (Go 1.17). UPD: done in 29a1181181fbfc3f8ff244227c9b0dc6aaa50c67 |
0533bda to
ea7e636
Compare
candiduslynx
left a comment
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.
OK, seems like now all workflows should pass
|
@zeroshade, could you please tell me if there is a chance to get review sooner? I'd like to sync this to cloudquery/cloudquery#10284 and use the |
…r` & `types.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString` (#849) Follow-up to apache/arrow#35457 BEGIN_COMMIT_OVERRIDE chore(tests): Ensure interface contract between `types.XArray.ValueStr` & `types.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString` (#849) feat(arrow): Add `types.XBuilder.NewXArray` helpers END_COMMIT_OVERRIDE
df8a331 to
4e2b295
Compare
zeroshade
left a comment
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.
Overall this looks good to me, just a few questions and some nitpicks.
4e2b295 to
f765a9a
Compare
d16fc4c to
cd9de70
Compare
candiduslynx
left a comment
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.
@zeroshade so, I guess I addressed everything that's been asked for.
Can you take another look?
zeroshade
left a comment
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.
Just one question to confirm, otherwise LGTM
zeroshade
left a comment
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.
Just one question to confirm, otherwise LGTM
|
Removed the extra piece in 2bf65c5, thanks for the review! |
|
@zeroshade the checks are finally done (I wonder if the largest one (conda) has to run the whole test suite, though) |
|
Benchmark runs are scheduled for baseline = b211c18 and contender = 05a57de. 05a57de is a master commit associated with this PR. Results will be available as each benchmark for each run completes. |
|
['Python', 'R'] benchmarks have high level of regressions. |
…Str` & `array.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString` (apache#35457) ### Rationale for this change I noticed that some values produced by `array.X.ValueStr` can't be parsed back by `array.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString` while debugging cloudquery/cloudquery#10284. Additionally, some arrays didn't implement the corresponding functions at all. ### What changes are included in this PR? * Ensure interface contract * Use `array.NullValueStr` constant * Fix bugs found along the way * Synced `internal/types/UUID` with CQ implementation to account for `valid` param ### Are these changes tested? This code was developed in TDD mode. The changes workflow was: 1. Introduce `XStringRoundTrip` tests to test that the resulting array will be equal in the Arrow sense (using [`array.Equal`](https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/apache/arrow/go/v12/arrow/array#Equal)) 2. Fix any discrepancies ### Are there any user-facing changes? Some fixes to the accepted values & parse logic to correspond to the interface contract. * Closes: apache#35421 Authored-by: candiduslynx <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Matt Topol <[email protected]>
…Str` & `array.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString` (apache#35457) ### Rationale for this change I noticed that some values produced by `array.X.ValueStr` can't be parsed back by `array.XBuilder.AppendValueFromString` while debugging cloudquery/cloudquery#10284. Additionally, some arrays didn't implement the corresponding functions at all. ### What changes are included in this PR? * Ensure interface contract * Use `array.NullValueStr` constant * Fix bugs found along the way * Synced `internal/types/UUID` with CQ implementation to account for `valid` param ### Are these changes tested? This code was developed in TDD mode. The changes workflow was: 1. Introduce `XStringRoundTrip` tests to test that the resulting array will be equal in the Arrow sense (using [`array.Equal`](https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/apache/arrow/go/v12/arrow/array#Equal)) 2. Fix any discrepancies ### Are there any user-facing changes? Some fixes to the accepted values & parse logic to correspond to the interface contract. * Closes: apache#35421 Authored-by: candiduslynx <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Matt Topol <[email protected]>
|
@github-actions crossbow submit verify-rc-source-integration-linux* |
|
Revision: 2bf65c5 Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-0f9abaae22 |
Rationale for this change
I noticed that some values produced by
array.X.ValueStrcan't be parsed back byarray.XBuilder.AppendValueFromStringwhile debugging cloudquery/cloudquery#10284.Additionally, some arrays didn't implement the corresponding functions at all.
What changes are included in this PR?
array.NullValueStrconstantinternal/types/UUIDwith CQ implementation to account forvalidparamAre these changes tested?
This code was developed in TDD mode. The changes workflow was:
XStringRoundTriptests to test that the resulting array will be equal in the Arrow sense (usingarray.Equal)Are there any user-facing changes?
Some fixes to the accepted values & parse logic to correspond to the interface contract.
ValueStr<->AppendValueFromStrconvention #35421