LakshSingla commented on code in PR #16708: URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/16708#discussion_r1673402739
########## processing/src/main/java/org/apache/druid/query/rowsandcols/column/LongArrayColumn.java: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,201 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, + * software distributed under the License is distributed on an + * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY + * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the + * specific language governing permissions and limitations + * under the License. + */ + +package org.apache.druid.query.rowsandcols.column; + +import org.apache.druid.java.util.common.ISE; +import org.apache.druid.java.util.common.Numbers; +import org.apache.druid.query.rowsandcols.util.FindResult; +import org.apache.druid.segment.column.ColumnType; + +import javax.annotation.Nonnull; +import javax.annotation.Nullable; +import java.util.Arrays; + +public class LongArrayColumn implements Column +{ + private final long[] vals; + + public LongArrayColumn( + long[] vals + ) + { + this.vals = vals; + } + + @Nonnull + @Override + public ColumnAccessor toAccessor() + { + return new MyColumnAccessor(); + } + + @Nullable + @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") + @Override + public <T> T as(Class<? extends T> clazz) + { + if (VectorCopier.class.equals(clazz)) { + return (T) (VectorCopier) (into, intoStart) -> { + if (Integer.MAX_VALUE - vals.length < intoStart) { + throw new ISE( + "too many rows!!! intoStart[%,d], vals.length[%,d] combine to exceed max_int", + intoStart, + vals.length + ); + } + for (int i = 0; i < vals.length; ++i) { + into[intoStart + i] = vals[i]; + } + }; + } + if (ColumnValueSwapper.class.equals(clazz)) { + return (T) (ColumnValueSwapper) (lhs, rhs) -> { + long tmp = vals[lhs]; + vals[lhs] = vals[rhs]; + vals[rhs] = tmp; + }; + } + return null; + } + + private class MyColumnAccessor implements BinarySearchableAccessor + { + @Override + public ColumnType getType() + { + return ColumnType.LONG; + } + + @Override + public int numRows() + { + return vals.length; + } + + @Override + public boolean isNull(int rowNum) + { + return false; + } + + @Override + public Object getObject(int rowNum) + { + return vals[rowNum]; + } + + @Override + public double getDouble(int rowNum) + { + return vals[rowNum]; + } + + @Override + public float getFloat(int rowNum) + { + return vals[rowNum]; + } + + @Override + public long getLong(int rowNum) + { + return vals[rowNum]; + } + + @Override + public int getInt(int rowNum) + { + return (int) vals[rowNum]; + } + + @Override + public int compareRows(int lhsRowNum, int rhsRowNum) + { + return Long.compare(vals[lhsRowNum], vals[rhsRowNum]); + } + + + @Override + public FindResult findNull(int startIndex, int endIndex) + { + return FindResult.notFound(endIndex); + } + + @Override + public FindResult findDouble(int startIndex, int endIndex, double val) + { + return findLong(startIndex, endIndex, (int) val); + } + + @Override + public FindResult findFloat(int startIndex, int endIndex, float val) + { + return findLong(startIndex, endIndex, (int) val); + } + + @Override + public FindResult findLong(int startIndex, int endIndex, long val) + { + if (vals[startIndex] == val) { + int end = startIndex + 1; + + while (end < endIndex && vals[end] == val) { + ++end; + } + return FindResult.found(startIndex, end); + } + + int i = Arrays.binarySearch(vals, startIndex, endIndex, val); Review Comment: The worst-case time complexity of this method is O(n) if all the values from `startIndex` to `endIndex` are the same. It can be improved by doing two binary searches to find the upper and the lower bound. It's the same implementation in other places as well. Is it worth to switch to that instead? If the array will always have mostly distinct values, then the current implementation would work better on average. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@druid.apache.org
