Iceberg iterators refactor #5549
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@harishjp please take a look |
deniskuzZ
changed the title
deniskuzZ
force-pushed
the
iceberg_iterator_refactor
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9eca73c to
6d322bf
Compare
asf-ci-hive
added
tests pending
tests unstable
and removed
tests failed
tests pending
labels
deniskuzZ
force-pushed
the
iceberg_iterator_refactor
branch
from
6d322bf to
beb0ac5
Compare
asf-ci-hive
added
tests pending
tests unstable
and removed
tests unstable
tests pending
labels
|
deniskuzZ
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Refactor Iceberg iterators
Why are the changes needed?
Close method is missing in a few places + release the resources sooner (use try-with-resources in a batch iterator)
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
Is the change a dependency upgrade?
No
How was this patch tested?
Existing tests + manual