wzx140 commented on code in PR #6745: URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/6745#discussion_r993193990
########## hudi-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hudi/common/model/HoodieAvroRecordMerger.java: ########## @@ -67,12 +74,12 @@ private HoodieRecord preCombine(HoodieRecord older, HoodieRecord newer) { } private Option<HoodieRecord> combineAndGetUpdateValue(HoodieRecord older, HoodieRecord newer, Schema schema, Properties props) throws IOException { - Option<HoodieAvroIndexedRecord> previousRecordAvroPayload = older.toIndexedRecord(schema, props); - if (!previousRecordAvroPayload.isPresent()) { + Option<IndexedRecord> previousAvroData = older.toIndexedRecord(schema, props).map(HoodieAvroIndexedRecord::getData); + if (!previousAvroData.isPresent()) { return Option.empty(); } - return ((HoodieAvroRecord) newer).getData().combineAndGetUpdateValue(previousRecordAvroPayload.get().getData(), schema, props) + return ((HoodieAvroRecord) newer).getData().combineAndGetUpdateValue(previousAvroData.get(), schema, props) .map(combinedAvroPayload -> new HoodieAvroIndexedRecord((IndexedRecord) combinedAvroPayload)); Review Comment: I don't think so. In HoodieAvroRecordMerger, we do `combineAndGetUpdateValue` before writing and shuffling is done before `combineAndGetUpdateValue`. We do `preCombine` with record which hold avro byte and then shuffle the result. So there is no performce loss. This is also the original logic. -- 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...@hudi.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org