[fix](test) Fix wrong split count assertion in test_hive_compress_type_large_data#62360
Merged
morningman merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom Apr 13, 2026
Conversation
…e_large_data Problem Summary: `test_hive_compress_type_large_data` fails because the second explain block hardcodes `inputSplitNum=16` for `file_split_size=8MB`, but on multi-BE clusters where `parallelExecInstanceNum * backendNum > 16`, count pushdown sets `needSplit=true`, causing files to be split by 8MB and producing 82 splits instead of 16. The first explain block already used dynamic logic to handle this case, but the second block did not. Fix: apply the same dynamic expectedSplitNum logic to both explain blocks.
Contributor
Author
|
run buildall |
Contributor
|
Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris. Please clearly describe your PR:
|
16 tasks
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Updates a flaky Hive regression test by making its expected split-count assertions adapt to cluster parallelism, fixing failures on multi-BE clusters where count pushdown enables file splitting.
Changes:
- Introduces a shared
needSplitcondition based onparallelExecInstanceNum * backendNumto determine whether splitting is expected. - Applies dynamic expected split counts to both
explainblocks (forfile_split_size=0andfile_split_size=8MB) instead of hardcodinginputSplitNum=16. - Expands inline comments to document the split-count expectations for each scenario.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
yiguolei
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 11, 2026
…e_large_data (#62361) ### What problem does this PR solve? Issue Number: close #xxx Related PR: #xxx Problem Summary: ### Release note Cherry-pick #62360 ### Check List (For Author) - Test <!-- At least one of them must be included. --> - [ ] Regression test - [ ] Unit Test - [ ] Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below) - [ ] No need to test or manual test. Explain why: - [ ] This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed. - [ ] Previous test can cover this change. - [ ] No code files have been changed. - [ ] Other reason <!-- Add your reason? --> - Behavior changed: - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Explain the behavior change --> - Does this need documentation? - [ ] No. - [ ] Yes. <!-- Add document PR link here. eg: apache/doris-website#1214 --> ### Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR) - [ ] Confirm the release note - [ ] Confirm test cases - [ ] Confirm document - [ ] Add branch pick label <!-- Add branch pick label that this PR should merge into -->
morningman
approved these changes
Apr 13, 2026
github-actions
bot
added
the
approved
Contributor
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
Contributor
|
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
CalvinKirs
approved these changes
Apr 13, 2026
hubgeter
approved these changes
Apr 13, 2026
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
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.
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #xxx
Related PR: #xxx
Problem Summary:
Release note
test_hive_compress_type_large_datafails because the second explain block hardcodesinputSplitNum=16forfile_split_size=8MB, but on multi-BE clusters whereparallelExecInstanceNum * backendNum > 16, count pushdown setsneedSplit=true, causing files to be split by 8MB and producing 82 splits instead of 16.The first explain block already used dynamic logic to handle this case, but the second block did not. Fix: apply the same dynamic expectedSplitNum logic to both explain blocks.
Check List (For Author)
Test
Behavior changed:
Does this need documentation?
Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)