GH-37702: [Java] Add vector validation consistent with C++ #37942
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
Member
Author
|
The NullVector and FixedSizeBinaryVector checks may not really be valuable. It doesn't look like it's possible to get these vectors in a state where these checks can fail. |
lidavidm
approved these changes
Sep 28, 2023
Comment on lines
100
to
101
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
shouldThrow is a bit of an awkward API; it seems like there's not that much logic here, and we could just duplicate it?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added checkPrecisionAndScaleNoThrow() to replace this overload.
github-actions
bot
added
awaiting merge
Make vector validation more consistent with Array::Validate() in C++: * Add validate() and validateFull() instance methods to vectors. * Validate that VarCharVector and LargeVarCharVector contents are valid UTF-8. * Validate that DecimalVector and Decimal256Vector contents fit within the supplied precision and scale. * Validate that NullVectors contain only nulls. * Validate that FixedSizeBinaryVector values have the correct length.
jduo
force-pushed
the
37702-java-validation
branch
from
16ed64e to
055924d
Compare
|
After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 5 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit a004102. There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉 The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them. |
loicalleyne
pushed a commit
to loicalleyne/arrow
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 13, 2023
…che#37942) ### Rationale for this change Make vector validation code more consistent with C++. Add missing checks and have the entry point be the same so that the code is easier to read/write when working with both languages. ### What changes are included in this PR? Make vector validation more consistent with Array::Validate() in C++: * Add validate() and validateFull() instance methods to vectors. * Validate that VarCharVector and LargeVarCharVector contents are valid UTF-8. * Validate that DecimalVector and Decimal256Vector contents fit within the supplied precision and scale. * Validate that NullVectors contain only nulls. * Validate that FixedSizeBinaryVector values have the correct length. ### Are these changes tested? Yes. ### Are there any user-facing changes? No. * Closes: apache#37702 Authored-by: James Duong <duong.james@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: David Li <li.davidm96@gmail.com>
dgreiss
pushed a commit
to dgreiss/arrow
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 19, 2024
…che#37942) ### Rationale for this change Make vector validation code more consistent with C++. Add missing checks and have the entry point be the same so that the code is easier to read/write when working with both languages. ### What changes are included in this PR? Make vector validation more consistent with Array::Validate() in C++: * Add validate() and validateFull() instance methods to vectors. * Validate that VarCharVector and LargeVarCharVector contents are valid UTF-8. * Validate that DecimalVector and Decimal256Vector contents fit within the supplied precision and scale. * Validate that NullVectors contain only nulls. * Validate that FixedSizeBinaryVector values have the correct length. ### Are these changes tested? Yes. ### Are there any user-facing changes? No. * Closes: apache#37702 Authored-by: James Duong <duong.james@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: David Li <li.davidm96@gmail.com>
pribor
pushed a commit
to GlobalWebIndex/arrow
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2025
…che#37942) ### Rationale for this change Make vector validation code more consistent with C++. Add missing checks and have the entry point be the same so that the code is easier to read/write when working with both languages. ### What changes are included in this PR? Make vector validation more consistent with Array::Validate() in C++: * Add validate() and validateFull() instance methods to vectors. * Validate that VarCharVector and LargeVarCharVector contents are valid UTF-8. * Validate that DecimalVector and Decimal256Vector contents fit within the supplied precision and scale. * Validate that NullVectors contain only nulls. * Validate that FixedSizeBinaryVector values have the correct length. ### Are these changes tested? Yes. ### Are there any user-facing changes? No. * Closes: apache#37702 Authored-by: James Duong <duong.james@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: David Li <li.davidm96@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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.
Rationale for this change
Make vector validation code more consistent with C++. Add missing checks and have the entry point
be the same so that the code is easier to read/write when working with both languages.
What changes are included in this PR?
Make vector validation more consistent with Array::Validate() in C++:
Are these changes tested?
Yes.
Are there any user-facing changes?
No.