Array fixes + make validity more lazy #9400
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Thanks! LGTM |
krlmlr
added a commit
to duckdb/duckdb-r
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 11, 2023
Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9164 from Mause/feature/jdbc-uuid-param Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9185 from pdet/adbc_07 Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9126 from Maxxen/parquet-kv-metadata Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9123 from lnkuiper/parquet_schema Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9086 from lnkuiper/json_inconsistent_structure Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#8977 from Tishj/python_readcsv_multi_v2 Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9279 from hawkfish/nsdate-cast Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#8851 from taniabogatsch/binary_lambdas Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#8983 from Maxxen/types/fixedsizelist Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9318 from Maxxen/fix-unused Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9220 from hawkfish/exclude Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9230 from Maxxen/json-plan-serialization Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9011 from Tmonster/add_create_statement_support_to_fuzzer Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9400 from Maxxen/array-fixes Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#8741 from Tishj/python_import_cache_upgrade Merge fixes Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9395 from taniabogatsch/lambda-performance Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9427 from Tishj/python_table_support_replacement_scan Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9516 from carlopi/fixformat Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9485 from Maxxen/fix-parquet-serialization Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9388 from chrisiou/issue217 Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9565 from Maxxen/fix-array-vector-sizes Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9583 from carlopi/feature Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#8907 from cryoEncryp/new-list-functions Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#8642 from Virgiel/capi-streaming-arrow Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#8658 from Tishj/pytype_optional Merge pull request duckdb/duckdb#9040 from Light-City/feature/set_mg
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.
This PR started as an investigation of a failing nightly test related to array child-validity masks in combination with vector_size=2, but ended up bundling a couple of small fixes.
STANDARD_VECTOR_SIZEsize, which is probably not equal to the child vector size since its always allocated as a multiple of the array size.As a consequence, ValidtyMasks now contain a "target count" property declaring the desired (or actual) capacity of their validity data, which defaults to
STANDARD_VECTOR_SIZEbut can be set to something else during construction. This target count is then used instead ofSTANDARD_VECTOR_SIZEwhen the validity data is actually initialized and allocated, i.e. when.Set(i, true)or.Initialize()is made.In effect validitymasks are now even lazier, and in theory we could defer initializing them even when
Resize():ing. Although I could not get that to work in this PR (skipping the initialization causes a verification failure in some list-related tests) I am planning to look into that and work on a proper refactor of the ValidityMask code in a followup PR.Closes https://github.com/duckdblabs/duckdb-internal/issues/497