Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Managed Iceberg] custom equals method for SerializedDataFile #33554

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ahmedabu98
Copy link
Contributor

Adding a more accurate equals method for SerializedDataFile because the default equals method does not account for objects of type Map<Integer, byte[]>.

This helps clean up logs like these, which are actually extremely noisy:
WARNING: Coder of type class org.apache.beam.sdk.schemas.SchemaCoder has a #structuralValue method which does not return true when the encoding of the elements is equal. Element FileWriteResult{tableIdentifierString={"namespace":["managed_iceberg_bqms_tests_no_delete"],"name":"testWriteToPartitionedTable_667244372263427"}, serializableDataFile=SerializableDataFile{path=gs://managed-iceberg-integration-tests/BigQueryMetastoreCatalogIT/408aefd5-2598-4fc3-b2e1-451500fff0c8/managed_iceberg_bqms_tests_no_delete.db/testWriteToPartitionedTable_667244372263427/data/bool=true/datetime_hour=1970-01-01-00/str_trunc=value_1/23583901-d389-4eca-a748-f7194ce06fbc_dae547f4-509e-4fd6-a805-b23cb94e2b55_1.parquet, fileFormat=PARQUET, recordCount=16, fileSizeInBytes=7052, partitionPath=bool=true/datetime_hour=0/str_trunc=value_1, partitionSpecId=0, keyMetadata=null, splitOffsets=[4], columnSizes={1=99, 2=106, 3=102, 4=45, 5=80, 9=91, 10=107, 11=83, 12=80, 13=83, 14=115, 16=80, 17=110, 18=121, 19=83, 20=151, 21=49, 23=49, 24=49, 25=49, 26=49}, valueCounts={1=16, 2=16, 3=16, 4=16, 5=16, 9=16, 10=16, 11=16, 12=16, 13=16, 14=16, 16=16, 17=16, 18=16, 19=16, 20=67, 21=16, 23=16, 24=16, 25=16, 26=16}, nullValueCounts={1=0, 2=0, 3=0, 4=0, 5=0, 9=0, 10=0, 11=0, 12=0, 13=0, 14=0, 16=0, 17=0, 18=0, 19=0, 20=3, 21=16, 23=16, 24=16, 25=16, 26=16}, nanValueCounts={17=0, 24=0}, lowerBounds={1=[B@1b0b6e85, 2=[B@76cb6b52, 3=[B@14752039, 4=[B@5b22e2ef, 5=[B@1b1dd048, 9=[B@36a1b982, 10=[B@be82387, 11=[B@47918d8f, 12=[B@32fb8aa5, 13=[B@9ad58d1, 14=[B@4313a678, 16=[B@825b660, 17=[B@66e5bb63, 18=[B@56d0cbe, 19=[B@5b135a0d}, upperBounds={1=[B@7ea061b9, 2=[B@35d5e3ad, 3=[B@58300155, 4=[B@19b2fb6c, 5=[B@64e2fc4a, 9=[B@7e30a3f0, 10=[B@26d22fca, 11=[B@2835d9e7, 12=[B@5bc66007, 13=[B@209267ac, 14=[B@1789b00b, 16=[B@1175b9fc, 17=[B@79db358d, 18=[B@4ac7821d, 19=[B@10146aa6}}}

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 9, 2025

Checks are failing. Will not request review until checks are succeeding. If you'd like to override that behavior, comment assign set of reviewers

Copy link
Contributor

Assigning reviewers. If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer:

R: @kennknowles for label java.
R: @damccorm for label build.
R: @Abacn for label io.

Available commands:

  • stop reviewer notifications - opt out of the automated review tooling
  • remind me after tests pass - tag the comment author after tests pass
  • waiting on author - shift the attention set back to the author (any comment or push by the author will return the attention set to the reviewers)

The PR bot will only process comments in the main thread (not review comments).

@@ -199,4 +203,53 @@ DataFile createDataFile(Map<Integer, PartitionSpec> partitionSpecs) {
}
return output;
}

@Override
@SuppressWarnings("EqualsHashCode")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't suppress this. You really need to address it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, I checked and saw that indeed the AutoValue hashcode is also implemented naively.

return false;
}
SerializableDataFile that = (SerializableDataFile) o;
return getPath().equals(that.getPath())
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are sure that autovalue equals doesn't handle this?

I am concerned that it is a lot of toil and error-prone to manage this list of calls. It really should be automated by autovalue.

Is there a way to combine any auto-generated equals with just the slight changes you intend?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The generated AutoValue equals method does a naive Map::equals operation, so it just checks reference equality for the byte arrays instead of the contents.

Is there a way to combine any auto-generated equals with just the slight changes you intend?

I'm not sure, is there a way to do this?

}

private static boolean mapEquals(
@Nullable Map<Integer, byte[]> map1, @Nullable Map<Integer, byte[]> map2) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The map isn't the issue, it is the byte[]. There may be an alternative byte buffer data structure that would have a structural equals.

Otherwise, what you need to do for structuralValue is wrap any mutable array. It is quite a pain.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right, ideally we'd be using ByteBuffer, but that currentl raises other issues. I saw your comment on the other PR and replied here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants