Minor : Improve hash join build side recordbatch size accuracy #13916
+12
−1
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
getChan
commented
Dec 27, 2024
|
|
||
| assert_contains!( | ||
| err.to_string(), | ||
| "Failed to allocate additional 120 bytes for HashJoinInput" |
alamb
approved these changes
Dec 27, 2024
alamb
changed the title
|
Thanks again @getChan |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Which issue does this PR close?
Part of #13430
Rationale for this change
In Hash Join build side, the RecordBatch size is overestimated.
I think that accurate memory accounting on the build side of hash join is important.
Fix it by using
get_record_batch_memory_size.What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Unit tested for a narrow range.
Are there any user-facing changes?
no