Skip to content

branch-3.0: [fix](iceberg) fix the iceberg eq-delete filter resize-fill bug. #51253 #51315

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
dataroaring merged 1 commit into from
May 29, 2025
Merged

branch-3.0: [fix](iceberg) fix the iceberg eq-delete filter resize-fill bug. #51253 #51315

dataroaring merged 1 commit into from
May 29, 2025

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented May 28, 2025

Cherry-picked from #51253

@ghkang98
[fix](iceberg) fix the iceberg eq-delete filter resize-fill bug. (#51253
1797a05 
)

solve the problem of inconsistent filter data in the doris eq-delete
scenario

Problem Summary:
When Doris reads iceberg's data, if there is eq-deleted data, when
filtering the data, the filter will have dirty data due to the incorrect
use of the resize-fill function, which will eventually cause Doris's
data to be filtered incorrectly.

[doris-iceberg-eq-delete-bug.pdf](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/20439214/doris-iceberg-eq-delete-bug.pdf)
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from dataroaring as a code owner May 28, 2025 06:06
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented May 28, 2025

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@dataroaring dataroaring reopened this May 28, 2025
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented May 28, 2025

run buildall

@doris-robot
Copy link

doris-robot commented May 28, 2025

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 0.00% (0/2) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 41.07% (10861/26443)
Line Coverage 31.89% (92753/290887)
Region Coverage 30.96% (47832/154481)
Branch Coverage 27.44% (24493/89266)

morningman
morningman approved these changes May 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@morningman morningman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@github-actions github-actions bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label May 29, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor Author

github-actions bot commented May 29, 2025

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor Author

github-actions bot commented May 29, 2025

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

dataroaring
dataroaring approved these changes May 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dataroaring dataroaring left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@dataroaring dataroaring merged commit 48523c0 into branch-3.0 May 29, 2025
23 of 26 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the auto-pick-51253-branch-3.0 branch May 29, 2025 11:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@morningman morningman morningman approved these changes

@dataroaring dataroaring dataroaring approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. reviewed

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@Thearas @doris-robot @morningman @dataroaring @ghkang98