Skip to content

[refine](column) enforce nullable nested types for array (#63088)#64698

Merged
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
apache:branch-4.1from
Mryange:branch-4.1-pick-63088
Jun 23, 2026
Merged

[refine](column) enforce nullable nested types for array (#63088)#64698
yiguolei merged 1 commit into
apache:branch-4.1from
Mryange:branch-4.1-pick-63088

Conversation

@Mryange

@Mryange Mryange commented Jun 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This PR makes the nested types inside Array explicitly nullable in BE type implementations, instead of relying on implicit caller-side conventions.

DataTypeArray now always stores nullable nested element type DataTypeArraySerDe updated to follow the same invariant

#63088

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #xxx

Related PR: #xxx

Problem Summary:

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

  • Test

    • Regression test
    • Unit Test
    • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
      • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
      • Previous test can cover this change.
      • No code files have been changed.
      • Other reason
  • Behavior changed:

    • No.
    • Yes.
  • Does this need documentation?

    • No.
    • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

  • Confirm the release note
  • Confirm test cases
  • Confirm document
  • Add branch pick label

This PR makes the nested types inside Array explicitly nullable in BE
type implementations, instead of relying on implicit caller-side
conventions.

DataTypeArray now always stores nullable nested element type
DataTypeArraySerDe updated to follow the same invariant

(cherry picked from commit 95752b7)
@Mryange Mryange requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner June 22, 2026 11:10
@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?

@Mryange

Mryange commented Jun 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

run buildall

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 73.68% (14/19) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE Regression Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 100.00% (19/19) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

BE Regression && UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 95.83% (23/24) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 73.83% (27479/37221)
Line Coverage 57.49% (297906/518230)
Region Coverage 55.14% (250139/453673)
Branch Coverage 56.53% (108282/191540)

@Mryange

Mryange commented Jun 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

run cloud_p0

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

BE Regression && UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 95.83% (23/24) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 73.83% (27479/37221)
Line Coverage 57.49% (297906/518230)
Region Coverage 55.14% (250139/453673)
Branch Coverage 56.53% (108282/191540)

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE Regression Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 100.00% (19/19) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit 470d4e9 into apache:branch-4.1 Jun 23, 2026
29 of 32 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants