[SPARK-45157][SQL] Avoid repeated if checks in [On|Off|HeapColumnVector
#42903
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
yaooqinn
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2023
wangyum
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2023
dongjoon-hyun
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2023
|
Also LGTM, thanks! |
|
Maybe a dumb procedural question: Can a follow-up cross release boundaries? v3.5.0 will have SPARK-44805 but not its follow-up. Should this be a new Jira? |
|
Oh, you are right. This should have a new JIRA., @bersprockets . |
dongjoon-hyun
changed the title
if checks in [On|Off|HeapColumnVector
|
I created an |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This is a small followup of #42850.
getByteschecks if thedictionaryis null or not, then callgetBytewhich also checks if thedictionaryis null or not. This PR avoids the repeated if checks by copying one line code fromgetBytetogetBytes. The same applies to othergetXXXmethods.Why are the changes needed?
Make the perf-critical path more efficient.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
no
How was this patch tested?
existing tests
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No