Fix parquet row number check for page bounds #20217
Open
Conversation
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
pmattione-nvidia
added
Performance
pmattione-nvidia
added
the
improvement
pmattione-nvidia
commented
Oct 9, 2025
| // if we are totally outside the range of the input, do nothing | ||
| if ((page_start_row > max_row) || (page_start_row + s->page.num_rows < min_row)) { | ||
| auto const page_end_row = page_start_row + s->page.num_rows; | ||
| if ((page_start_row >= end_row) || (page_end_row <= min_row)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The only real change: adding = on the comparisons
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This fixes a bug in the row number checking that determines whether or not a page needs to be processed. Before, if there are 20k rows per page and we skip 20k rows, page_start_row == max_row and we would still process the page despite there being nothing to do. Ditto with the minimum row check. Although this is a bug, it is effectively just a minor missed optimization opportunity so it didn't cause any tests to fail previously. I've renamed the "max" variables to "end" to make the bug and the code clearer.
Checklist