HIVE-27370: support 4 bytes characters #5624
Open
+165
−33
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
|
|
@difin, please take a look when you have time |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
If a
SUBSTRUDF has a 4-byte characters in its parameter, the behavior is different between vectorized and non-vectorized. The vectorized version handles 4-byte characters properly, but the non-vectorized version does not, so similar logic is needed.And these fixes use vectorized logic:
https://github.com/apache/hive/blob/master/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/vector/expressions/StringSubstrColStartLen.java#L89-L130
https://github.com/apache/hive/blob/master/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/vector/expressions/StringSubstrColStart.java#L78-L109
Why are the changes needed?
Vectorized and non-vectorized have different results.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Added pattern tests to itest for these to work correctly.