CurtHagenlocher commented on code in PR #2961:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/pull/2961#discussion_r2157380014


##########
ci/configs/flightsql-spiceai.json:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+{
+       "driverPath": "../../../../../go/adbc/pkg/libadbc_driver_flightsql.so",
+       "driverEntryPoint": "FlightSqlDriverInit",
+       "testEnvironments": [
+        "SpiceAI_Local"

Review Comment:
   nit: this file is mostly tab-indented but this one line has spaces. It would 
be nice to be consistent.



##########
csharp/test/Drivers/Interop/FlightSql/FlightSqlTestConfiguration.cs:
##########
@@ -40,7 +40,9 @@ internal enum FlightSqlTestEnvironmentType
         Denodo,
         Dremio,
         DuckDB,
-        SQLite
+        SQLite,
+

Review Comment:
   nit: remove blank line



##########
csharp/src/Apache.Arrow.Adbc/Extensions/IArrowArrayExtensions.cs:
##########
@@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ public static class IArrowArrayExtensions
                     return ((Int64Array)arrowArray).GetValue(index);
                 case ArrowTypeId.String:
                     return ((StringArray)arrowArray).GetString(index);
+                case ArrowTypeId.LargeString:
+                    return ((LargeStringArray)arrowArray).GetString(index);

Review Comment:
   We should also add `LargeBinary`, `LargeList`, `StringView`, `BinaryView` 
and `ListView`, though that doesn't need to be part of this PR. Does spice.ai 
return any of those types?
   
   We can't add `LargeStringView`, `LargeBinaryView` or `LargeListView` until 
the C# Arrow library supports those types.



##########
csharp/test/Drivers/Interop/FlightSql/ClientTests.cs:
##########
@@ -159,12 +159,12 @@ public void CanClientExecuteQueryWithNoResults()
         {
             foreach (FlightSqlTestEnvironment environment in _environments)
             {
-                environment.Query = "SELECT * WHERE 0=1";
+                environment.Query = "SELECT 1 WHERE false"; // The query 
simulates no results

Review Comment:
   Can we change this to `SELECT 1 WHERE 0=1`? The vast majority of my deep SQL 
experience is with MSSQL and SQL-92 compatible systems, and boolean types and 
literals weren't added until SQL-99 (and still aren't supported by MSSQL). So 
while my view may be overly colored by that experience, it does still suggest 
that `0=1` will be more-widely supported than `FALSE`.



-- 
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]

Reply via email to