mrhhsg commented on PR #69288: URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/69288#issuecomment-6283371627
<!-- autopilot-response --> Reviewed the current review state at head `be394b4675c2df72f939406ee66e724d52b195c2`. - `PRR_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABTBibMA` (Code Review, COMMENTED): no actionable findings. Its trace matches the code: in `FunctionJsonbModify::write_json_value` the current object is already open and waiting for a key, so the removed `writeStartObject()` was rejected by the writer state machine and the removed `writeEndObject()` closed the current object early. With the pair gone, the remaining `writeEndObject()` closes the current object and enclosing objects can still emit their following members. The optional null/container-value, multi-pair and const-shape combinations it mentions are coverage suggestions, not defects; the changed path is already covered by the new BE rows and the ordered SQL cases. - `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdY8YwQ` (contribution checklist prompt): the PR description covers the requested points (problem and reproduction, root cause, fix, behavior change and impact, tests). No new feature was added and no unrelated code was refactored. - `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdY8eBA` (`/review`): the Code Review workflow completed for this head with no actionable finding, so there is nothing to fix from this comment. - `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdZFJQA` (`run buildall`) and the TPC-H / TPC-DS / ClickBench reports (`IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdbU2xA`, `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdbhfWQ`, `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdbnpOw`): benchmark runs for this head, informational only; no code action required. - `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdmr-tg` (`run beut`): BE UT passed for this head. Locally, `FunctionJsonbTEST.*` (20 tests, including the new `JsonbModifyNestedMissingMemberKeepsFollowingSiblings`) was re-run on the head build and all 20 tests passed. - `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdmsCYQ` (`run external`) and `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdmsGSw` (`run nonConcurrent`): pipeline trigger comments; no code action required. - `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdn3jKg`, `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdn9jiQ` and `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdoQ2dA` (BE UT / BE Regression && UT coverage reports): informational only; the last one repeats the same report for the same commit. - The earlier `<!-- autopilot-response -->` comments (`IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdZD3VA`, `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdmndXg`, `IC_kwDOBfSlxs8AAAABdn9izg`): prior round summaries, kept for context. There are no inline review threads on this PR. No code changes were made in this round, and the branch head is unchanged at `be394b4675c2df72f939406ee66e724d52b195c2`. Could a human reviewer take another look and approve if the change looks good? -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
