Skip to content

branch-4.1: [fix](be) Preserve collect aggregate limit during merge #63361#63383

Merged
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-63361-branch-4.1
May 20, 2026
Merged

branch-4.1: [fix](be) Preserve collect aggregate limit during merge #63361#63383
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
branch-4.1from
auto-pick-63361-branch-4.1

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cherry-picked from #63361

Problem Summary: collect_list and collect_set aggregate states with a
limit could lose their initialized max_size during merge because several
merge paths overwrote the left state max_size with the right state
unconditionally. If the right state was still uninitialized, later
merge/add operations could ignore the requested limit.

### Release note

None

### Check List (For Author)

- Test: Unit Test
    - build-support/clang-format.sh
    - build-support/check-format.sh
- ./run-be-ut.sh --run
--filter=VAggCollectTest.*:AggregateFunctionCollectTest.*
- build-support/run-clang-tidy.sh --build-dir be/ut_build_ASAN (failed:
local clang-tidy could not analyze due to missing stddef.h in the
toolchain include path and an existing unmatched NOLINTEND diagnostic in
be/src/core/types.h)
- Behavior changed: Yes. collect_list/collect_set merge preserves an
initialized max_size limit instead of overwriting it with an
uninitialized right-side state.
- Does this need documentation: No
@github-actions github-actions Bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner May 19, 2026 03:46
@hello-stephen
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@hello-stephen
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

run buildall

@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit a6dbf94 into branch-4.1 May 20, 2026
28 of 31 checks passed
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.

3 participants