[SPARK-54522][SQL][TEST] Variant test suite fixes for shredding configs #53242
Conversation
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
cloud-fan
changed the title
| val keyIterator = (0 until numKeys).iterator | ||
| // We start in long range because the shredded writer writes int64 by default which wouldn't | ||
| // match narrower binaries. | ||
| val keyIterator = (Int.MaxValue + 1L until Int.MaxValue + 1L + numKeys).iterator |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks like a regression because it increases the memory requirement heavily, doesn't it, @harshmotw-db ?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@dongjoon-hyun it's still numKeys elements, it just changes the starting value.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Got it. Initially, I worried about the size because numKeys was 128k. After I computed the actual values, I also realized that it doesn't increase effectively.
val numKeys = 128 * 1024
val keyIterator1 = (0 until numKeys).iterator
val keyIterator2 = (Int.MaxValue + 1L until Int.MaxValue + 1L + numKeys).iterator
val entries1 = Array.fill(numKeys)(s"""\"${keyIterator1.next()}\": \"test\"""")
val entries2 = Array.fill(numKeys)(s"""\"${keyIterator2.next()}\": \"test\"""")
val jsonStr1 = s"{${entries1.mkString(", ")}}"
val jsonStr2 = s"{${entries2.mkString(", ")}}"
scala> jsonStr1.length
val res1: Int = 2248186
scala> jsonStr2.length
val res2: Int = 2883584
Thanks.
dongjoon-hyun
requested changes
Nov 27, 2025
Member
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of adding a regression on the test, can we explicit set the configuration requirement at the beginning of the test case, @harshmotw-db ?
dongjoon-hyun
approved these changes
Nov 28, 2025
Member
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1, LGTM. Thank you, @harshmotw-db and @cloud-fan .
Merged to master/4.1.
dongjoon-hyun
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 28, 2025
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR makes minor changes to test suites so that they pass with variant shredding-related configs enabled, without hurting the purpose of the tests. ### Why are the changes needed? These changes would help tests pass if shredding configs were enabled by default in the future. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? Existing tests. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes #53242 from harshmotw-db/harshmotw-db/suite_fixes. Authored-by: Harsh Motwani <harsh.motwani@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org> (cherry picked from commit 5b0a667) Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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 changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR makes minor changes to test suites so that they pass with variant shredding-related configs enabled, without hurting the purpose of the tests.
Why are the changes needed?
These changes would help tests pass if shredding configs were enabled by default in the future.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Existing tests.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No