gabotechs commented on code in PR #16519:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/16519#discussion_r2165952424
##########
datafusion/functions-aggregate/src/array_agg.rs:
##########
@@ -994,6 +1002,34 @@ mod tests {
Ok(())
}
+ #[test]
+ fn does_not_over_account_memory_for_merge() -> Result<()> {
+ let (mut acc1, mut acc2) =
ArrayAggAccumulatorBuilder::string().build_two()?;
+
+ let a1 = ListArray::from_iter_primitive::<UInt64Type, _, _>(vec![
+ Some(vec![Some(0), Some(1), Some(2)]),
+ Some(vec![Some(3)]),
+ None,
+ Some(vec![Some(4)]),
+ ]);
+ let a2 = ListArray::from_iter_primitive::<UInt64Type, _, _>(vec![
+ Some(vec![Some(0), Some(1), Some(2)]),
+ Some(vec![Some(3)]),
+ None,
+ Some(vec![Some(4)]),
+ ]);
+
+ acc1.merge_batch(&[Arc::new(a1.slice(0, 1))])?;
+ acc2.merge_batch(&[Arc::new(a2.slice(0, 1))])?;
+
+ acc1 = merge(acc1, acc2)?;
Review Comment:
The `merge_batch` functions do not receive arbitrary data, it receives the
results of calling `state()` in other accumulators. A fairer test would be to
do something like:
```suggestion
acc1.update_batch(&[Arc::new(a1.slice(0, 1))])?;
acc2.update_batch(&[Arc::new(a2.slice(0, 1))])?;
acc1 = merge(acc1, acc2)?;
```
With this, you would notice that the test result is the same regardless of
the changes in this PR
--
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: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-h...@datafusion.apache.org
