Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Add Distribution::HashPartitioned to Distribution::KeyPartitioned API bridge - #23259
Conversation
Distribution::HashPartitioned to Distribution::KeyPartitioned API bridgeThank you for opening this pull request! Reviewer note: cargo-semver-checks reported the current version number is not SemVer-compatible with the changes in this pull request (compared against the base branch). Details |
15c8c67 to
a7a0d37CompareUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @gabotechs and @gene-bordegaray
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
a7a0d37 to
858990aComparegene-bordegaray
commented
Jun 30, 2026
adresse comments thanks 👍 |
gabotechs
commented
Jul 1, 2026
Nice, thanks @gene-bordegaray and @alamb! |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
… API bridge (apache#23259) <!-- 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 to an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closesapache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> - Closesapache#23236. <!-- 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. --> `HashPartitioned` is historical naming for a key-partitioning requirement. This keeps the old variant as a deprecated compatibility bridge while moving DataFusion internals to `KeyPartitioned`. <!-- 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. --> Adds `KeyPartitioned`, deprecates `HashPartitioned`, and treats both equivalently during the transition to avoid breaking changes for downstream consumers. A blast radius report on this was done here apache#23241 <!-- 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)? --> Yes. <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. --> Yes, `Distribution::HashPartitioned` is deprecated and trainsitioned to `Distribution::KeyPartitioned`. <!-- If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label. -->
… API bridge (apache#23259) <!-- 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 to an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes#123` indicates that this PR will close issue #123. --> - Closesapache#23236. <!-- 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. --> `HashPartitioned` is historical naming for a key-partitioning requirement. This keeps the old variant as a deprecated compatibility bridge while moving DataFusion internals to `KeyPartitioned`. <!-- 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. --> Adds `KeyPartitioned`, deprecates `HashPartitioned`, and treats both equivalently during the transition to avoid breaking changes for downstream consumers. A blast radius report on this was done here apache#23241 <!-- 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)? --> Yes. <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. --> Yes, `Distribution::HashPartitioned` is deprecated and trainsitioned to `Distribution::KeyPartitioned`. <!-- If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label. -->
Which issue does this PR close?
Rationale for this change
HashPartitionedis historical naming for a key-partitioning requirement. This keeps the old variant as a deprecated compatibility bridge while moving DataFusion internals toKeyPartitioned.What changes are included in this PR?
Adds
KeyPartitioned, deprecatesHashPartitioned, and treats both equivalently during the transition to avoid breaking changes for downstream consumers. A blast radius report on this was done here #23241Are these changes tested?
Yes.
Are there any user-facing changes?
Yes,
Distribution::HashPartitionedis deprecated and trainsitioned toDistribution::KeyPartitioned.