[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOBBLIN-2163?focusedWorklogId=940573&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-940573
]
ASF GitHub Bot logged work on GOBBLIN-2163:
-------------------------------------------
Author: ASF GitHub Bot
Created on: 28/Oct/24 20:57
Start Date: 28/Oct/24 20:57
Worklog Time Spent: 10m
Work Description: phet commented on code in PR #4064:
URL: https://github.com/apache/gobblin/pull/4064#discussion_r1819707567
##########
gobblin-data-management/src/test/java/org/apache/gobblin/data/management/copy/iceberg/IcebergTableMetadataValidatorUtilsTest.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,200 @@
+/*
+ * 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.gobblin.data.management.copy.iceberg;
+
+import java.io.IOException;
+import java.util.HashMap;
+
+import org.apache.iceberg.PartitionSpec;
+import org.apache.iceberg.TableMetadata;
+import org.apache.iceberg.avro.AvroSchemaUtil;
+import org.apache.iceberg.Schema;
+import org.apache.iceberg.shaded.org.apache.avro.SchemaBuilder;
+import org.testng.Assert;
+import org.testng.annotations.Test;
+
+public class IcebergTableMetadataValidatorUtilsTest {
+ private static final PartitionSpec unpartitionedPartitionSpec =
PartitionSpec.unpartitioned();
+ private static final Schema schema1 =
AvroSchemaUtil.toIceberg(SchemaBuilder.record("schema1")
+ .fields()
+ .requiredString("field1")
+ .requiredString("field2")
+ .endRecord());
+ private static final Schema schema2IsNotSchema1Compat =
AvroSchemaUtil.toIceberg(SchemaBuilder.record("schema2")
+ .fields()
+ .requiredString("field2")
+ .requiredString("field1")
+ .endRecord());
+ private static final Schema schema3 =
AvroSchemaUtil.toIceberg(SchemaBuilder.record("schema3")
+ .fields()
+ .requiredString("field1")
+ .requiredString("field2")
+ .requiredInt("field3")
+ .endRecord());
+ private static final Schema schema4IsNotSchema3Compat =
AvroSchemaUtil.toIceberg(SchemaBuilder.record("schema4")
+ .fields()
+ .requiredInt("field1")
+ .requiredString("field2")
+ .requiredInt("field3")
+ .endRecord());
+ private static final PartitionSpec partitionSpec1 =
PartitionSpec.builderFor(schema1)
+ .identity("field1")
+ .build();
+ private static final TableMetadata
tableMetadataWithSchema1AndUnpartitionedSpec = TableMetadata.newTableMetadata(
+ schema1, unpartitionedPartitionSpec,
"tableLocationForSchema1WithUnpartitionedSpec", new HashMap<>());
+ private static final TableMetadata tableMetadataWithSchema1AndPartitionSpec1
= TableMetadata.newTableMetadata(
+ schema1, partitionSpec1, "tableLocationForSchema1WithPartitionSpec1",
new HashMap<>());
+ private static final TableMetadata
tableMetadataWithSchema3AndUnpartitionedSpec = TableMetadata.newTableMetadata(
+ schema3, unpartitionedPartitionSpec,
"tableLocationForSchema3WithUnpartitionedSpec", new HashMap<>());
+ private static final String SCHEMA_MISMATCH_EXCEPTION = "Schema Mismatch
between Metadata";
+ private static final String PARTITION_SPEC_MISMATCH_EXCEPTION = "Partition
Spec Mismatch between Metadata";
+ private static final boolean VALIDATE_STRICT_PARTITION_EQUALITY_TRUE =
Boolean.TRUE;
+ private static final boolean VALIDATE_STRICT_PARTITION_EQUALITY_FALSE =
Boolean.FALSE;
+ @Test
+ public void testValidateSameSchema() throws IOException {
+ IcebergTableMetadataValidatorUtils.failUnlessCompatibleStructure(
+ tableMetadataWithSchema1AndUnpartitionedSpec,
tableMetadataWithSchema1AndUnpartitionedSpec,
+ VALIDATE_STRICT_PARTITION_EQUALITY_TRUE
+ );
+ }
+
+ @Test
+ public void testValidateDifferentSchema() {
+ // Schema 1 and Schema 2 have different field order
+
+ TableMetadata tableMetadataWithSchema2AndUnpartitionedSpec =
TableMetadata.newTableMetadata(schema2IsNotSchema1Compat,
+ unpartitionedPartitionSpec,
"tableLocationForSchema2WithUnpartitionedSpec", new HashMap<>());
+
+
verifyFailUnlessCompatibleStructureIOException(tableMetadataWithSchema1AndUnpartitionedSpec,
+ tableMetadataWithSchema2AndUnpartitionedSpec,
SCHEMA_MISMATCH_EXCEPTION);
+ }
+
+ @Test
+ public void testValidateSchemaWithDifferentTypes() {
+ // schema 3 and schema 4 have different field types for field1
+
+ TableMetadata tableMetadataWithSchema4AndUnpartitionedSpec =
TableMetadata.newTableMetadata(schema4IsNotSchema3Compat,
+ unpartitionedPartitionSpec,
"tableLocationForSchema4WithUnpartitionedSpec", new HashMap<>());
+
+
verifyFailUnlessCompatibleStructureIOException(tableMetadataWithSchema3AndUnpartitionedSpec,
+ tableMetadataWithSchema4AndUnpartitionedSpec,
SCHEMA_MISMATCH_EXCEPTION);
+ }
+
+ @Test
+ public void testValidateSchemaWithEvolvedSchemaI() {
+ // TODO: This test should pass in the future when we support schema
evolution
+ // Schema 3 has one more extra field as compared to Schema 1
+
verifyFailUnlessCompatibleStructureIOException(tableMetadataWithSchema1AndUnpartitionedSpec,
+ tableMetadataWithSchema3AndUnpartitionedSpec,
SCHEMA_MISMATCH_EXCEPTION);
+ }
+
+ @Test
+ public void testValidateSchemaWithEvolvedSchemaII() {
+ // TODO: This test should pass in the future when we support schema
evolution
+ // Schema 3 has one more extra field as compared to Schema 1
+
verifyFailUnlessCompatibleStructureIOException(tableMetadataWithSchema3AndUnpartitionedSpec,
+ tableMetadataWithSchema1AndUnpartitionedSpec,
SCHEMA_MISMATCH_EXCEPTION);
+ }
Review Comment:
looking across these two test cases, when we do later support schema
evolution, do we really expect it to be a symmetrical operation (where both
cases would pass)? I'd have thought to only support forward-compatibility, but
not backward compat. i.e. S is compatible w/ S\`, but S\` is no longer
compatible w/ S.
Issue Time Tracking
-------------------
Worklog Id: (was: 940573)
Time Spent: 2h 20m (was: 2h 10m)
> Add IcebergTable Metadata Validator
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: GOBBLIN-2163
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOBBLIN-2163
> Project: Apache Gobblin
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Vivek Rai
> Priority: Major
> Time Spent: 2h 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Add a new class IcebergTableMetadataValidator which should validates table
> metadata like schema partition spec between two iceberg tables
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
