klion26 commented on code in PR #7935:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/7935#discussion_r2218119219


##########
parquet-variant/src/builder.rs:
##########
@@ -1134,39 +1197,86 @@ impl<'a> ObjectBuilder<'a> {
             )));
         }
 
-        let data_size = self.buffer.offset();
-        let num_fields = self.fields.len();
-        let is_large = num_fields > u8::MAX as usize;
+        let metadata_builder = self.parent_state.metadata_builder();
 
         self.fields.sort_by(|&field_a_id, _, &field_b_id, _| {
-            let key_a = &metadata_builder.field_name(field_a_id as usize);
-            let key_b = &metadata_builder.field_name(field_b_id as usize);
-            key_a.cmp(key_b)
+            let field_a_name = metadata_builder.field_name(field_a_id as 
usize);
+            let field_b_name = metadata_builder.field_name(field_b_id as 
usize);
+            field_a_name.cmp(field_b_name)
         });
 
-        let max_id = self.fields.iter().map(|(i, _)| *i).max().unwrap_or(0);
+        // the length of the metadata's field names is a very cheap to compute 
the upper bound.
+        // it will almost always be a tight upper bound as well -- it would 
take a pretty
+        // carefully  crafted object to use only the early field ids of a 
large dictionary.
+        let max_id = metadata_builder.field_names.len();

Review Comment:
   IIUC, `metadata_builder.field_names.len()` returns the size of the 
underlying map, it may be bigger than the actual max `field_id`, changing to 
this here is that it can avoid one pass for the `field_ids` to calucalute the 
`max_id`.
   
   But this change can make test more diffict(more difficult to calculate the 
header size) -- such as the failed case 
`from_json::test::test_json_to_variant_object_very_large`  ([test code 
here](https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/blob/82821e574df7e699c7a491da90c54429a5a439e9/parquet-variant-json/src/from_json.rs#L633)/[failed
 
ci](https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/actions/runs/16401976375/job/46342711866?pr=7935))
   
   @alamb @viirya @scovich Maybe we can revert this to the original code(travel 
one pass from `filed_ids`) what do you think about this? thanks.  -- added a 
separate commit which reverted this logic to see if any other tests failed.



-- 
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: github-unsubscr...@arrow.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Reply via email to