Skip to content
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

[Java] Fix IntervalMonthDayNanoVector constructor to set correct minor type #35733

Closed
wgtmac opened this issue May 24, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #35734
Closed

[Java] Fix IntervalMonthDayNanoVector constructor to set correct minor type #35733

wgtmac opened this issue May 24, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #35734

Comments

@wgtmac
Copy link
Member

wgtmac commented May 24, 2023

Describe the bug, including details regarding any error messages, version, and platform.

Currently the IntervalMonthDayNanoVector constructor does not set minor type correctly as below:

  public IntervalMonthDayNanoVector(String name, BufferAllocator allocator) {
    this(name, FieldType.nullable(MinorType.INTERVALDAY.getType()), allocator);
  }

Component(s)

Java

lidavidm pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 24, 2023
…35734)

### Rationale for this change

The constructor of IntervalMonthDayNanoVector does not set minor type correctly.

```java
  public IntervalMonthDayNanoVector(String name, BufferAllocator allocator) {
    this(name, FieldType.nullable(MinorType.INTERVALDAY.getType()), allocator);
  }
```

It should be `MinorType.INTERVALMONTHDAYNANO`.

### What changes are included in this PR?

Change it to set `MinorType.INTERVALMONTHDAYNANO`.

### Are these changes tested?

Added test to verify vector type.

### Are there any user-facing changes?

No.
* Closes: #35733

Authored-by: Gang Wu <ustcwg@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David Li <li.davidm96@gmail.com>
@lidavidm lidavidm added this to the 13.0.0 milestone May 24, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants