HippoBaro opened a new pull request, #9847:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/9847

   # Which issue does this PR close?
   
   <!--
   We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and 
enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can 
link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax.
   -->
   
   - Contributes to #9731
   
   # Rationale for this change
   
   <!--
   Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in 
the issue then this section is not needed.
   Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your 
changes and offer better suggestions for fixes.
   -->
   
   `InMemoryArrayReader` couples a column's in-memory representation (an Arrow 
array) with its storage representation (def/rep levels) and assumes a 1:1 
mapping between array elements and levels. This holds when list readers consume 
fully-padded child arrays — one element per level, nulls included.
   
   Upcoming work pushes null filtering from `ListArrayReader` down into the 
child reader at the storage level, breaking that 1:1 assumption: the child 
returns fewer array elements than levels, and the mapping between them depends 
on the filtering logic itself. Keeping the mock would mean reimplementing that 
logic: testing filtered output against a second, hand-rolled filter.
   
   # What changes are included in this PR?
   
   <!--
   There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is 
sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR.
   -->
   
   Replace `InMemoryArrayReader` with real `PrimitiveArrayReader` instances 
backed by in-memory Parquet pages. Tests now accept raw non-null values and 
levels (matching what Parquet actually stores) and exercise the production 
`RecordReader` path.
   
   # Are these changes tested?
   
   <!--
   We typically require tests for all PRs in order to:
   1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes
   2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code
   
   If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are 
they covered by existing tests)?
   -->
   
   All tests passing.
   
   # Are there any user-facing changes?
   
   <!--
   If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be 
updated before approving the PR.
   
   If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please call them out.
   -->
   
   None.
   


-- 
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