Uploaded image for project: 'Apache Drill'
  1. Apache Drill
  2. DRILL-3659

UnionAllRecordBatch infers wrongly from next() IterOutcome values



    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Labels:


      When UnionAllRecordBatch uses IterOutcome values returned from the next() method of upstream batches, it seems to be using those values wrongly (making incorrect inferences about what they mean).

      In particular, some switch statements seem to check for NONE vs. OK_NEW_SCHEMA in order to determine whether there are any rows (instead of explicitly checking the number of rows). However, OK_NEW_SCHEMA can be returned even when there are zero rows.

      The apparent latent bug in the union code blocks the fix for DRILL-2288 (having ScanBatch return OK_NEW_SCHEMA for a zero-rows case in which is was wrongly (per the IterOutcome protocol) returning NONE without first returning OK_NEW_SCHEMA).

      For details of IterOutcome values, see the Javadoc documentation of RecordBatch.IterOutcome (after DRILL-3641 is merged; until then, see https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/113).

      For an environment/code state that exposes the UnionAllRecordBatch problems, see https://github.com/dsbos/incubator-drill/tree/bugs/WORK_2288_etc, which includes:

      • a test that exposes the DRILL-2288 problem;
      • an enhanced IteratorValidatorBatchIterator, which now detects IterOutcome value sequence violations; and
      • a fixed (though not-yet-cleaned) version of ScanBatch that fixes the DRILL-2288 problem and thereby exposes the UnionAllRecordBatch problem (several test methods in each of TestUnionAll and TestUnionDistinct fail).


          Issue Links



              • Assignee:
                dsbos Daniel Barclay
                dsbos Daniel Barclay
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                2 Start watching this issue


                • Created: