Skip to content

branch-4.1: [feature](iceberg) support insert into iceberg table with sort-order (#60540) - #61414

Merged
morningman merged 2 commits into
apache:branch-4.1from
zhangstar333:branch-4.1-03-17
Mar 17, 2026
Merged

branch-4.1: [feature](iceberg) support insert into iceberg table with sort-order (#60540)#61414
morningman merged 2 commits into
apache:branch-4.1from
zhangstar333:branch-4.1-03-17

Conversation

@zhangstar333

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Problem Summary:
cherry-pick from master (#60540)

…pache#60540)

Problem Summary:

support write iceberg table with sort-order, the write data have been
local sorted, and have add lower/upper_bounds metadata. so the iceberg
plan could use it to prune datafile.
**Notes**: this is only a local sort, not global sort. so if you are
more parallel about iceberg writer, you many see overlapping of
lower/upper_bounds between files.
if you need a global sort, maybe could add order by cluster in the
insert SQL.

you could create table, and then alter table eg:
```
CREATE TABLE test_table2 (
    id INT,
    name STRING,
    score DOUBLE,
    create_time datetime
)
ORDER BY (
    id ASC NULLS FIRST,
    score DESC NULLS LAST)
PROPERTIES (
  'write-format'='ORC'
);
```
@zhangstar333
zhangstar333 requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner March 17, 2026 03:43
@Thearas

Thearas commented Mar 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@zhangstar333

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

run buildall

@doris-robot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Cloud UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 79.15% (1788/2259)
Line Coverage 64.46% (31960/49580)
Region Coverage 65.30% (15995/24496)
Branch Coverage 55.88% (8512/15234)

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 32.61% (15/46) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@zhangstar333

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

run buildall

@doris-robot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Cloud UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 79.15% (1788/2259)
Line Coverage 64.44% (31951/49580)
Region Coverage 65.23% (15979/24496)
Branch Coverage 55.86% (8509/15234)

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 32.61% (15/46) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 0.29% (2/698) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 52.81% (19289/36527)
Line Coverage 36.15% (180133/498254)
Region Coverage 32.67% (139380/426622)
Branch Coverage 33.69% (60633/179987)

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

BE Regression && UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 0.43% (3/697) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 71.36% (25519/35761)
Line Coverage 54.12% (269155/497369)
Region Coverage 51.52% (222009/430896)
Branch Coverage 53.01% (95757/180632)

@morningman
morningman merged commit 5c12aa0 into apache:branch-4.1 Mar 17, 2026
24 of 28 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants