Implement Take for UnionArray #4883
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
avantgardnerio
requested review from
thinkharderdev,
alamb,
tustvold and
Dandandan
|
This doesn't appear like it would support dense unions? Perhaps we could get a test? |
Interesting. So with dense unions we use the same buffer to store both sets of values? Probably using the |
|
How would you feel if I added a |
|
I don't see an issue with not supporting dense unions |
tustvold
approved these changes
Oct 1, 2023
Co-authored-by: Raphael Taylor-Davies <1781103+tustvold@users.noreply.github.com>
avantgardnerio
added a commit
to coralogix/arrow-rs
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2023
Implement Take for UnionArray (apache#4883) (cherry picked from commit 4320a75)
avantgardnerio
added a commit
to coralogix/arrow-rs
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
Closes #4882.
Rationale for this change
We should implement Take for UnionArray
What changes are included in this PR?
Take is implemented for UnionArray
Are there any user-facing changes?
Yes, more DataFusion queries should work.