Kevin-Li-2025 opened a new pull request, #10298:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/pull/10298

   # Which issue does this PR close?
   
   - Closes #10291.
   
   # Rationale for this change
   
   `prepare_field_for_flight` currently rebuilds `DataType::LargeList` fields 
with `Field::new_list`, which changes the schema to a regular `List`. This 
silently loses the original large-list offset type in the Flight encoder's 
prepared schema.
   
   The existing `ListView` / `LargeListView` path below this code already 
preserves the large variant, so this appears to be the same preservation rule 
missing for `LargeList`.
   
   # What changes are included in this PR?
   
   - Use `Field::new_large_list` when preparing `DataType::LargeList` fields 
for Flight.
   - Add a regression test that verifies the prepared Flight schema preserves a 
`LargeList` field, including field metadata and the nested item field.
   
   # Are these changes tested?
   
   Yes, locally with Rust 1.96.0 on macOS because the repository-pinned Rust 
1.96.1 toolchain download was not completing cleanly in this environment.
   
   - `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN=1.96.0-aarch64-apple-darwin cargo fmt --check`
   - `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN=1.96.0-aarch64-apple-darwin cargo test -p arrow-flight 
test_large_list_schema_encoded`
   - `RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN=1.96.0-aarch64-apple-darwin cargo test -p arrow-flight 
encode::tests`
   - `git diff --check`
   
   I used AI assistance to help inspect the nearby Flight schema-preparation 
paths and generate the focused regression test, then validated the change with 
the commands above.
   
   # Are there any user-facing changes?
   
   Yes. Flight-encoded schemas now preserve `LargeList` instead of exposing it 
as `List` after schema preparation.
   


-- 
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: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to