the-other-tim-brown commented on code in PR #13444:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/13444#discussion_r2193285530
##########
hudi-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hudi/common/table/read/FileGroupRecordBuffer.java:
##########
@@ -565,27 +570,62 @@ protected boolean hasNextBaseRecord(T baseRecord,
BufferedRecord<T> logRecordInf
Pair<Boolean, T> isDeleteAndRecord = merge(baseRecordInfo,
logRecordInfo);
if (!isDeleteAndRecord.getLeft()) {
// Updates
- nextRecord = readerContext.seal(isDeleteAndRecord.getRight());
+ nextRecord =
readerContext.seal(applyOutputSchemaConversion(isDeleteAndRecord.getRight()));
Review Comment:
https://gist.github.com/the-other-tim-brown/ae9e1edc153aa11968b2c522606e2c0c
Here's a gist with my approach and findings. We can see that the check is
less than .2 nanoseconds (10,000 checks results in ~600 nanoseconds on average
(1500 upper bound) increase when compared to the average of similar code
without the check. Also benchmarked the use of Hudi's `Option` class which is
even slower which is expected.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
