Skip to content

[FLINK-38046][Connector/JDBC]Solve the issue of missing one piece of data #174

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wangxiaojing wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+17 −1
Open

[FLINK-38046][Connector/JDBC]Solve the issue of missing one piece of data #174

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
c5e764e
Solve the issue of missing one piece of data
Jul 4, 2025
fb154a2
Solve the issue of missing one piece of data
Jul 7, 2025
a02397d
add testCase
Jul 11, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion ...main/java/org/apache/flink/connector/jdbc/split/JdbcNumericBetweenParametersProvider.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -106,11 +106,12 @@ public Serializable[][] getParameterValues() {

Serializable[][] parameters = new Serializable[batchNum][2];
long start = minVal;
for (int i = 0; i < batchNum; i++) {
for (int i = 0; i < batchNum - 1; i++) {
long end = start + batchSize - 1 - (i >= bigBatchNum ? 1 : 0);
parameters[i] = new Long[] {start, end};
start = end + 1;
}
parameters[batchNum - 1] = new Long[] {start, maxVal};
return parameters;
}

Expand Down
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions ...test/java/org/apache/flink/connector/jdbc/split/NumericBetweenParametersProviderTest.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -115,6 +115,21 @@ void testBatchNumTooLarge() {
check(expected, actual);
}

@Test
void testBatchMaxMinTooLarge() {
JdbcNumericBetweenParametersProvider provider =
new JdbcNumericBetweenParametersProvider(2260418954055131340L, 3875220057236942850L)
.ofBatchSize(3);
Copy link
Contributor

@RocMarshal RocMarshal Dec 8, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you mean that we should call the ofBatchNum method here?

Serializable[][] actual = provider.getParameterValues();

long[][] expected = {
new long[] {2260418954055131340L, 2798685988449068510L},
new long[] {2798685988449068511L, 3336953022843005681L},
new long[] {3336953022843005682L, 3875220057236942850L}
};
Comment on lines +125 to +129
Copy link
Contributor

@RocMarshal RocMarshal Dec 8, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
long[][] expected = {
new long[] {2260418954055131340L, 2798685988449068510L},
new long[] {2798685988449068511L, 3336953022843005681L},
new long[] {3336953022843005682L, 3875220057236942850L}
};
long[][] expected = {
new long[] {2260418954055131340L, 2798685988449068491L},
new long[] {2798685988449068492L, 3336953022843005643L},
new long[] {3336953022843005644L, 3875220057236942850L}
};
image

I tried to follow your train of thought to review this test case. Perhaps you were trying to convey this expected outcome. Please let me know your opinion.

check(expected, actual);
}

private void check(long[][] expected, Serializable[][] actual) {
assertThat(actual).hasDimensions(expected.length, expected[0].length);
for (int i = 0; i < expected.length; i++) {
Expand Down