rdblue commented on a change in pull request #922: URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/922#discussion_r441193557
########## File path: core/src/test/java/org/apache/iceberg/TestPartitionSpecUpdate.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,255 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, + * software distributed under the License is distributed on an + * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY + * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the + * specific language governing permissions and limitations + * under the License. + */ + +package org.apache.iceberg; + +import org.junit.Assert; +import org.junit.Test; +import org.junit.runner.RunWith; +import org.junit.runners.Parameterized; + +@RunWith(Parameterized.class) +public class TestPartitionSpecUpdate extends TableTestBase { + + private int[] expectedFieldIds; + + private String[] expectedSpecs; + + @Parameterized.Parameters + public static Object[][] parameters() { + return new Object[][] { + new Object[] { 1, new int[]{ 1000, 1001, 1001, 1000, 1000 }, + new String[]{" 1000: data_bucket_removed: void(2)\n", " 1002: id_bucket_removed: void(1)\n"} }, + new Object[] { 2, new int[]{ 1001, 1000, 1001, 1002, 1002 }, new String[]{"", ""} }, + }; + } + + public TestPartitionSpecUpdate(int formatVersion, int[] expectedFieldIds, String[] expectedSpecs) { + super(formatVersion); + this.expectedFieldIds = expectedFieldIds; + this.expectedSpecs = expectedSpecs; + } + + @Test + public void testCommitUpdatedSpec() { + Assert.assertEquals("[\n" + + " 1000: data_bucket: bucket[16](2)\n" + + "]", table.spec().toString()); + Assert.assertEquals(1000, table.spec().lastAssignedFieldId()); + + table.updateSpec().clear() + .addBucketField("id", 8) + .addBucketField("data", 16) + .commit(); + + Assert.assertEquals("[\n " + + expectedFieldIds[0] + ": id_bucket: bucket[8](1)\n " + + expectedFieldIds[1] + ": data_bucket: bucket[16](2)\n" + + "]", table.spec().toString()); + Assert.assertEquals(expectedFieldIds[2], table.spec().lastAssignedFieldId()); + + table.updateSpec().clear() + .addTruncateField("data", 8) + .commit(); + + Assert.assertEquals("[\n " + + expectedFieldIds[3] + ": data_trunc: truncate[8](2)\n" + + "]", table.spec().toString()); + Assert.assertEquals(expectedFieldIds[4], table.spec().lastAssignedFieldId()); + } + + @Test + public void testUpdateException() { + AssertHelpers.assertThrows( + "Should throw IllegalArgumentException if there is an invalid partition field", + IllegalArgumentException.class, "Cannot use partition name more than once: id_bucket", + () -> table.updateSpec().clear() + .addBucketField("id", 8) + .addBucketField("id", 16) + .commit()); + } + + @Test + public void testAddDuplicateFieldException() { + AssertHelpers.assertThrows( + "Should throw IllegalArgumentException if adding a duplicate partition field", + IllegalArgumentException.class, "Cannot use partition name more than once: data_bucket", + () -> table.updateSpec() + .addBucketField("data", 16) + .commit()); + } + + @Test + public void testAddSamePartitionField() { + Assert.assertEquals("[\n" + + " 1000: data_bucket: bucket[16](2)\n" + + "]", table.spec().toString()); + + if (formatVersion == 1) { + table.updateSpec() + .addBucketField("data", 16, "data_partition") + .commit(); + Assert.assertEquals("[\n" + + " 1000: data_bucket: bucket[16](2)\n" + + " 1001: data_partition: bucket[16](2)\n" + + "]", table.spec().toString()); + } else { + AssertHelpers.assertThrows( + "Should throw IllegalArgumentException if adding a duplicate partition field", + IllegalArgumentException.class, + "Field Id 1000 has already been used in the existing partition fields", + () -> table.updateSpec() + .addBucketField("data", 16, "data_partition") + .commit()); + } + } + + @Test + public void testAddField() { + Assert.assertEquals("[\n" + + " 1000: data_bucket: bucket[16](2)\n" + + "]", table.spec().toString()); + Assert.assertEquals(1000, table.spec().lastAssignedFieldId()); + + table.updateSpec() + .addBucketField("data", 8, "data_partition") Review comment: I think we should have a validation that rejects multiple bucket functions applied to the same table column. It doesn't make sense to do this. I should note that there are some cases where you'd want to. Moving from `bucket[16]` to `bucket[32]`, for example, makes sense because the bucket function ensures that values are split between 2 buckets when moving from 16 to 32. So you could keep both in metadata without harm. But that isn't the case generally: if you had `bucket[7]` along with `bucket[11]`, you'd end up with 77 different combinations. If that's what the user wants, then they should use `bucket[77]`, not two separate bucket functions. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
