Skip to content

[59_maintenance] fix: account for offsets in runarrays when using extend for MutableArrayData - #11671

Merged
Jefffrey merged 3 commits into
apache:59_maintenancefrom
Jefffrey:backport_11546
Oct 21, 2026
Merged

Jefffrey merged 3 commits into
apache:59_maintenancefrom
Jefffrey:backport_11546

Conversation

@Jefffrey

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

…rayData (apache#11546)

# Which issue does this PR close?

<!--
It is not necessary to raise an issue, but it is encouraged if it is a
non-trivial
enhancement/bug.

If this PR relates to an existing issue, but does not fully resolve it,
please change
the wording below from "Closes #NNN" to "Relates to #NNN" or "Part of
#NNN" to avoid
false closing an issue.
-->

None

# Rationale for this change

<!--
Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly
in the
issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes
are proposed
helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for
fixes.

Please try to explain the problem you are trying to solve in terms of
the user-visible
behavior, rather than the implementation.
-->

Correctness edge case when using RunArrays in MutableArrayData

# What changes are included in this PR?

<!--
There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it
is
sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this
PR.
-->

- Account for `ArrayData` offset of RunArrays when extending
`MutableArrayData`
- Checked conversion of usize length to Run index type to avoid wrapping

# Are these changes tested?

<!--
We typically require tests for all PRs in order to:
1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes
2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code

If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example,
are they
covered by existing tests, if so identify these tests)?

If this PR claims a performance improvement, please include evidence
such as
benchmark results.

DO NOT simply paste a list of commands ran to verify the code; this is
what our
CI is for and it pollutes the PR. ONLY explain if testing was included
with this
PR, or why it wasn't.
-->

Yes

# Are there any significant user-facing changes?

<!--
Significant user-facing changes include:
- Breaking public API change
- Significant change to existing functionality (e.g. function returns
something different)

These need to be explicitly called out to ensure we have proper
documentation if
required and to ensure we follow proper semantic versioning.

DO NOT restate the changes of this PR; if a bug was fixed and already
explained
above, we don't need this to be restated as a user-facing change.
-->

No
@Jefffrey Jefffrey added the bug label Oct 18, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the arrow-core Core crates related to representing arrow data label Oct 18, 2026
@Jefffrey
Jefffrey marked this pull request as draft October 18, 2026 10:33
@Jefffrey

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@alamb
alamb marked this pull request as ready for review October 20, 2026 11:38
@alamb

alamb commented Oct 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I merged up

@Jefffrey
Jefffrey merged commit a6c71f5 into apache:59_maintenance Oct 21, 2026
31 checks passed
@Jefffrey
Jefffrey deleted the backport_11546 branch October 21, 2026 10:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

arrow-core Core crates related to representing arrow data bug

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants