Use correct setting for click bench queries in sql_planner benchmark#19835
Merged
alamb merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom Jan 15, 2026
Merged
Use correct setting for click bench queries in sql_planner benchmark#19835alamb merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
alamb merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
Closed
comphead
approved these changes
Jan 15, 2026
Contributor
Author
|
Awesome -- thank you @comphead |
de-bgunter
pushed a commit
to de-bgunter/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 24, 2026
…pache#19835) ## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#19809 ## Rationale for this change The ClickBench partitioned dataset was written by an ancient version of pyarrow that that wrote strings with the wrong logical type. To read it correctly, we must automatically convert binary to string. This is the configuration we run the ClickBench benchmark in as well: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/blob/cd12d510395eabb7ee51cac0a4cc7c7ffd1ac841/benchmarks/src/clickbench.rs#L184-L183 ## What changes are included in this PR? Change the sql planner benchmark to use the correct setting I tested it manually -- before this change this command fails ```shell cargo bench --profile=dev --bench sql_planner -- q50 ... thread 'main' (38326073) panicked at datafusion/core/benches/sql_planner.rs:62:14: called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: Context("type_coercion", Internal("Expect TypeSignatureClass::Native(LogicalType(Native(String), String)) but received NativeType::Binary, DataType: BinaryView")) note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace ``` After this change the command passes ## Are these changes tested? <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? --> ## Are there any user-facing changes? <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. --> <!-- If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label. -->
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
2 participants
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?
Rationale for this change
The ClickBench partitioned dataset was written by an ancient version of pyarrow that that wrote strings with the wrong logical type. To read it correctly, we must automatically convert binary to string.
This is the configuration we run the ClickBench benchmark in as well:
https://github.com/apache/datafusion/blob/cd12d510395eabb7ee51cac0a4cc7c7ffd1ac841/benchmarks/src/clickbench.rs#L184-L183
What changes are included in this PR?
Change the sql planner benchmark to use the correct setting
I tested it manually -- before this change this command fails
After this change the command passes
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?