westonpace commented on a change in pull request #10008:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/10008#discussion_r613435402



##########
File path: cpp/src/arrow/dataset/file_base.cc
##########
@@ -102,6 +102,79 @@ Result<std::shared_ptr<FileFragment>> 
FileFormat::MakeFragment(
                        std::move(partition_expression), 
std::move(physical_schema)));
 }
 
+// TODO(ARROW-12355[CSV], ARROW-11772[IPC], ARROW-11843[Parquet]) The following
+// implementation of ScanBatchesAsync is both ugly and terribly ineffecient.  
Each of the
+// formats should provide their own efficient implementation.
+Result<RecordBatchGenerator> FileFormat::ScanBatchesAsync(
+    const ScanOptions& options, const std::shared_ptr<FileFragment>& file) {
+  std::shared_ptr<ScanOptions> scan_options = 
std::make_shared<ScanOptions>(options);
+  ARROW_ASSIGN_OR_RAISE(auto scan_task_it, ScanFile(scan_options, file));
+  struct State {
+    State(std::shared_ptr<ScanOptions> scan_options, ScanTaskIterator 
scan_task_it)
+        : scan_options(std::move(scan_options)),
+          scan_task_it(std::move(scan_task_it)),
+          current_rb_it(),
+          current_rb_gen(),
+          finished(false) {}
+
+    std::shared_ptr<ScanOptions> scan_options;
+    ScanTaskIterator scan_task_it;
+    RecordBatchIterator current_rb_it;
+    RecordBatchGenerator current_rb_gen;
+    bool finished;
+  };
+  struct Generator {
+    Future<std::shared_ptr<RecordBatch>> operator()() {
+      if (state->finished) {
+        return AsyncGeneratorEnd<std::shared_ptr<RecordBatch>>();
+      }
+      if (!state->current_rb_it && !state->current_rb_gen) {
+        RETURN_NOT_OK(PumpScanTask());
+        if (state->finished) {
+          return AsyncGeneratorEnd<std::shared_ptr<RecordBatch>>();
+        }
+      }
+      if (state->current_rb_gen) {
+        return NextAsync();
+      }
+      return NextSync();
+    }
+    Future<std::shared_ptr<RecordBatch>> NextSync() {
+      ARROW_ASSIGN_OR_RAISE(auto next_sync, state->current_rb_it.Next());
+      if (IsIterationEnd(next_sync)) {

Review comment:
       Oh.  I think you are right.  I should probably add a scanner unit test 
that generates more than one scan task.  I'll work on that.




-- 
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.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


Reply via email to