feat(writer): add PositionDeleteInput builder - #3230
Open
laskoviymishka wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
laskoviymishka wants to merge 1 commit into
laskoviymishka wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Add PositionDeleteInputBuilder, a small helper that assembles a spec-conforming position delete RecordBatch from (path, pos) rows. The batch has exactly the two required position delete columns (file_path: Utf8, pos: Int64), both non-null and carrying the reserved field ids, so it passes PositionDeleteFileWriter's per-batch validation and can be handed straight to that writer. An empty builder still produces a valid 0-row batch. To keep a single source of truth for the field-id wiring, the Arrow schema is no longer hand-wired in the builder. This commit un-gates the previously test-only POSITION_DELETE_ARROW_SCHEMA static and position_delete_arrow_schema() helper in position_delete_writer.rs, making the helper pub(crate), and the builder now obtains the shared Arrow projection through it as a cheap Arc clone. extend accepts any iterator of (Into<String>, i64) rows, and build debug-asserts the paths/positions length invariant. The module docs note that rows are materialized into two heap Vecs before the batch is built (so very large inputs should use one builder per write batch), that the optional third row column is not supported yet, and that position delete files are a v2 construct which v3 forbids, so a format-version gate must be applied at the transaction/commit layer. Relates to apache#340 and apache#2218.
laskoviymishka
marked this pull request as ready for review
September 15, 2026 20:02
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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 are included in this PR?
Add PositionDeleteInputBuilder, a small helper that assembles a spec-conforming position delete RecordBatch from (path, pos) rows.
The batch has exactly the two required position delete columns (file_path: Utf8, pos: Int64), both non-null and carrying the reserved field ids, so it passes PositionDeleteFileWriter's per-batch validation and can be handed straight to that writer. An empty builder still produces a valid 0-row batch.
To keep a single source of truth for the field-id wiring, the Arrow schema is no longer hand-wired in the builder. This commit un-gates the previously test-only POSITION_DELETE_ARROW_SCHEMA static and position_delete_arrow_schema() helper in position_delete_writer.rs, making the helper pub(crate), and the builder now obtains the shared Arrow projection through it as a cheap Arc clone.
extend accepts any iterator of (Into, i64) rows, and build debug-asserts the paths/positions length invariant. The module docs note that rows are materialized into two heap Vecs before the batch is built (so very large inputs should use one builder per write batch), that the optional third row column is not supported yet, and that position delete files are a v2 construct which v3 forbids, so a format-version gate must be applied at the transaction/commit layer.
Which issue does this PR close?
Relates to #340 and #2218.
Are these changes tested?
yes, new and existing tests