-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
Core: Use avro compression properties from table properties when writing manifests and manifest lists (API change) #8617
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
a89dbc8
Respect avro compression properties for manifest files
sumeetgajjar 62f39b7
Explicitly pass compression codec and compression level instead of ge…
sumeetgajjar ac59712
Incorporate second round of feedback
sumeetgajjar 9ace75d
Rebase on master.
wypoon 1228542
Address feedback.
wypoon ae26b64
Make new ManifestWriter::newAppender non-abstract to avoid breaking r…
wypoon 88613cd
Address feedback from Ryan Blue.
wypoon b0caadf
Update Spark 3.4.
wypoon 4a2a650
Update Flink 1.17.
wypoon 8306e42
Address further feedback and port changes to Spark 3.5 as well.
wypoon 0d8ec19
Make new ManifestWriter::newAppender method abstract.
wypoon File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we shouldn't be breaking the API. See also my comment in #6799 (comment) on how to avoid breaking the API for adding the new method
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, your suggestion was followed in #6799 and I haven't reverted it there.
I think @ConeyLiu's point is that the new
newAppendermethod doesn't break the API because it is not abstract -- it calls the oldnewAppender. However, the oldnewAppenderis deprecated and when it is removed, the newnewAppenderthen has to be changed. There is no natural implementation for it, so it should be abstract. Of course, one could do something else, such as return null or throw anUnsupportedOperationException.If anyone out there actually writes their own
ManifestWritersubclass, they would need to implement anewAppender(PartitionSpec, OutputFile, String, Integer)method. We avoid breaking the API now, which allows them to get away without implementing the new method, but whennewAppender(PartitionSpec, OutputFile)is then removed, that will break them (even if we do not technically break the API by keepingnewAppender(PartitionSpec, OutputFile, String, Integer)non-abstract and throwing anUnsupportedOperationException-- it effectively breaks them).