Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on May 10, 2024. It is now read-only.

PARQUET-516: Better error handling in LocalFileSource#56

Closed
asandryh wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
asandryh:PARQUET-516
Closed

PARQUET-516: Better error handling in LocalFileSource#56
asandryh wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
asandryh:PARQUET-516

Conversation

@asandryh
Copy link
Contributor

Also, a fix for PARQUET-537: Ensure LocalFileSource is closed properly.

SerializedFile::~SerializedFile() {
Close();
}

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This addresses PARQUET-537

@asandryh
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wesm Can you look at this PR and let me know whether this is what you had in mind for PARQUET-516? Thanks.

@wesm
Copy link
Member

wesm commented Feb 18, 2016

Yes, but we need to write unit tests to verify the correct functioning of these classes and their methods.

@asandryh
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wesm Right, will do. Just wanted to check first whether you had anything else in mind.

@wesm
Copy link
Member

wesm commented Feb 19, 2016

In the tests the main thing will be failing in the expected ways (e.g. exceptions raised instead of core dump / segfault later).

@wesm
Copy link
Member

wesm commented Feb 29, 2016

I'm working on a patch for PARQUET-520 and will add unit tests for the rest of input.h/cc.

Aliaksei Sandryhaila added 2 commits February 29, 2016 13:19
@asandryh
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wesm I've updated this PR with unit tests. Please take a look.

ss << "Cannot seek to position " << pos << " in file [" << path_
<< "] of size " << size_;
throw ParquetException(ss.str());
}
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some implementations of fseek() will not produce an error if you try to seek past the end of the file. Hence, we should track this explicitly.

@wesm
Copy link
Member

wesm commented Feb 29, 2016

Argh, we have crossed streams.

@wesm
Copy link
Member

wesm commented Feb 29, 2016

Can you create a separate patch for PARQUET-537? I will incorporate the additional unit tests here into my patch-in-progress (which also includes a MemoryMapSource).

@wesm
Copy link
Member

wesm commented Feb 29, 2016

Please see #66 and let me know if I missed any test cases here

@asfgit asfgit closed this in 41c1e68 Mar 1, 2016
@asandryh asandryh deleted the PARQUET-516 branch March 1, 2016 16:26
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants