Skip to content

Conversation

@wesm
Copy link
Member

@wesm wesm commented Oct 14, 2019

Some more work is needed in ARROW-6869 to move the memo table resetting logic out of DictionaryBuilder::Reset but we can leave that for 1.0.0 work

@github-actions
Copy link

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It would be nice to provide some documentation for how/when this method should be used.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed. Ideally we should be able to avoid having this new method?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not disable this with

Suggested change
// TEST(TestStringDictionaryBuilder, BigDeltaDictionary) {
// TEST(DISABLED_TestStringDictionaryBuilder, BigDeltaDictionary) {

@pitrou
Copy link
Member

pitrou commented Oct 16, 2019

I think if this is disabling the current delta support then this shouldn't go into 0.15.1. Is there a way to solve the Parquet issue without touching delta support (which can be done in another PR for a later version)? For example by adding e.g. a FullReset() method on DictionaryBuilder).

@wesm
Copy link
Member Author

wesm commented Oct 16, 2019

@pitrou I just pushed a much simpler fix that does not touch the dictionary delta logic. I'll rebase a patch I have done for ARROW-6869 after this is merged into master

Copy link
Member

@pitrou pitrou left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM on the principle, just one suggestion in the tests.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should you try an actual re-use of the builder below? In case some internal state (e.g. the memo) is not properly reinitialized.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, no problem.

@wesm
Copy link
Member Author

wesm commented Oct 17, 2019

+1. Merging this

@wesm wesm closed this in 83ed357 Oct 17, 2019
@wesm wesm deleted the ARROW-6861 branch October 17, 2019 18:02
kszucs pushed a commit to kszucs/arrow that referenced this pull request Oct 21, 2019
…eset and AppendIndices in DictionaryBuilder

Some more work is needed in ARROW-6869 to move the memo table resetting logic out of `DictionaryBuilder::Reset` but we can leave that for 1.0.0 work

Closes apache#5643 from wesm/ARROW-6861 and squashes the following commits:

9a19773 <Wes McKinney> Test using dictionary builder again after finish
890a6dc <Wes McKinney> Simpler fix for ARROW-6861

Authored-by: Wes McKinney <wesm+git@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Wes McKinney <wesm+git@apache.org>
kszucs pushed a commit to kszucs/arrow that referenced this pull request Oct 21, 2019
…eset and AppendIndices in DictionaryBuilder

Some more work is needed in ARROW-6869 to move the memo table resetting logic out of `DictionaryBuilder::Reset` but we can leave that for 1.0.0 work

Closes apache#5643 from wesm/ARROW-6861 and squashes the following commits:

9a19773 <Wes McKinney> Test using dictionary builder again after finish
890a6dc <Wes McKinney> Simpler fix for ARROW-6861

Authored-by: Wes McKinney <wesm+git@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Wes McKinney <wesm+git@apache.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants