Skip to content

[fix](parqeut)Fixed a performance fallback caused by filling RL DL when reading Parquet scalar columns. (#59833) - #60130

Merged
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
apache:branch-4.0from
hubgeter:pick_40_fix_parquet_falt_slow
Jan 22, 2026
Merged

[fix](parqeut)Fixed a performance fallback caused by filling RL DL when reading Parquet scalar columns. (#59833)#60130
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
apache:branch-4.0from
hubgeter:pick_40_fix_parquet_falt_slow

Conversation

@hubgeter

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Related PR: #58785

Problem Summary:
The performance rollback was introduced in #58785. The reason is that, prior to #58785, reading ordinary columns did not require filling and saving the RL DL. #58785 combined the logic for reading ordinary columns from a struct with the logic for reading ordinary columns, and filled and saved the RL DL to populate the null map information of the struct. This PR re-separates the reading logic.

…en reading Parquet scalar columns. (apache#59833)
Related PR: apache#58785
Problem Summary:
The performance rollback was introduced in apache#58785. The reason is that,
prior to apache#58785, reading ordinary columns did not require filling and
saving the RL DL. apache#58785 combined the logic for reading ordinary columns
from a struct with the logic for reading ordinary columns, and filled
and saved the RL DL to populate the null map information of the struct.
This PR re-separates the reading logic.
@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@hubgeter

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

run buildall

@doris-robot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 80.00% (20/25) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

CategoryCoverage
Function Coverage52.72% (18899/35848)
Line Coverage35.83% (175471/489674)
Region Coverage32.48% (135761/417994)
Branch Coverage33.34% (58862/176548)

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label Jan 22, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

@yiguolei
yiguolei merged commit 36d4e58 into apache:branch-4.0Jan 22, 2026
24 of 26 checks passed
ybtsdst pushed a commit to ybtsdst/doris that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2026
…en reading Parquet scalar columns. (apache#59833) (apache#60130)
Related PR: apache#58785
Problem Summary:
The performance rollback was introduced in apache#58785. The reason is that,
prior to apache#58785, reading ordinary columns did not require filling and
saving the RL DL. apache#58785 combined the logic for reading ordinary columns
from a struct with the logic for reading ordinary columns, and filled
and saved the RL DL to populate the null map information of the struct.
This PR re-separates the reading logic.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approvedIndicates a PR has been approved by one committer.reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@hubgeter@hello-stephen@doris-robot@yiguolei