[Parquet] test adaptive predicate pushdown with skipped page#9243
Merged
alamb merged 2 commits intoapache:mainfrom Jan 22, 2026
Merged
[Parquet] test adaptive predicate pushdown with skipped page#9243alamb merged 2 commits intoapache:mainfrom
alamb merged 2 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
alamb
approved these changes
Jan 22, 2026
Contributor
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @erratic-pattern -- I took the liberty of updating this test to also verify the output is correct, both with and without using the page index.
Contributor
|
Why keep both selection and the first predicate, are they not creating the same selection? |
Contributor
Author
This makes sense to me. I double checked again and it looks like the tag predicate could be removed. |
Contributor
Follow on PR? |
Contributor
alamb
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 30, 2026
…in sparse column chunk data: 754, no matching page found." (#9301) # Which issue does this PR close? <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. --> - Closes #9239. # Rationale for this change Check issue <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> # What changes are included in this PR? Added a copy of `override_selector_strategy_if_needed` to the filter application stage. Now if we use mask selection, and there are skipped pages in predicate projection we enforce RLE selection. <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> # Are these changes tested? Yes, using #9243 <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? --> # 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. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
alamb
added a commit
to alamb/arrow-rs
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 30, 2026
…in sparse column chunk data: 754, no matching page found." (apache#9301) <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. --> - Closes apache#9239. Check issue <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> Added a copy of `override_selector_strategy_if_needed` to the filter application stage. Now if we use mask selection, and there are skipped pages in predicate projection we enforce RLE selection. <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> Yes, using apache#9243 <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? --> <!-- 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. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
alamb
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 2, 2026
… "Invalid offset …(#9301) (#9309) - Part of #9240 - Related to #9239 This is a backport of the following PRs to the 57 line - #9243 from @erratic-pattern (test) - #9301 from @sdf-jkl (the fix) Co-authored-by: Kosta Tarasov <[email protected]>
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Remove the
should_panicwhen the issue is fixed.