Skip to content

minor: handle NULL array input in array_remove and array_replace#22790

Merged
alamb merged 5 commits into
apache:mainfrom
lyne7-sc:fix/array_remove_null_input
Jun 10, 2026
Merged

minor: handle NULL array input in array_remove and array_replace#22790
alamb merged 5 commits into
apache:mainfrom
lyne7-sc:fix/array_remove_null_input

Conversation

@lyne7-sc

@lyne7-sc lyne7-sc commented Jun 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Which issue does this PR close?

  • Closes #.

Rationale for this change

array_remove errored out when given a NULL array argument.

array_replace handled the DataType::Null case, but it always built a NULL array of length 1, regardless of the actual input length.

remove and replace share nearly identical implementations, so they should treat a NULL array argument the same way

What changes are included in this PR?

  • array_remove: handle DataType::Null in both array_remove_internal and the scalar fast-path array_remove_with_scalar_args, returning a NULL array of the input length.
  • array_replace: fix the existing DataType::Null branches to use the input array length (array.len() / list_array.len()) instead of a hard-coded 1.

Are these changes tested?

Yes, added slt coverage

Are there any user-facing changes?

array_remove/array_remove_n/array_remove_all now return NULL for a NULL-typed array argument instead of raising an error. No breaking API changes.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt) functions Changes to functions implementation labels Jun 6, 2026
@@ -65,11 +65,36 @@ select

#TODO: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/7142

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do we still need to address this comment?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NULL handling looks complete here, this comment can be cleaned up. #7142 is still tracked in other files, so we're not losing the reference.

@alamb alamb added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 10, 2026
Merged via the queue into apache:main with commit 8f06354 Jun 10, 2026
35 checks passed
@lyne7-sc lyne7-sc deleted the fix/array_remove_null_input branch June 11, 2026 07:44
AdamGS pushed a commit to AdamGS/arrow-datafusion that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2026
…che#22790)

## Which issue does this PR close?

<!--
We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and
enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases.
You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example
`Closes apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123.
-->

- Closes #.

## 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.
-->

`array_remove` errored out when given a `NULL` array argument.

`array_replace` handled the `DataType::Null` case, but it always built a
NULL array of length 1, regardless of the actual input length.

`remove` and `replace` share nearly identical implementations, so they
should treat a NULL array argument the same way

## 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.
-->

- `array_remove`: handle `DataType::Null` in both
`array_remove_internal` and the scalar fast-path
`array_remove_with_scalar_args`, returning a NULL array of the input
length.
- `array_replace`: fix the existing `DataType::Null` branches to use the
input array length (`array.len()` / `list_array.len()`) instead of a
hard-coded `1`.

## Are these changes tested?

Yes, added slt coverage

<!--
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)?
-->

## Are there any user-facing changes?

`array_remove`/`array_remove_n`/`array_remove_all` now return `NULL` for
a `NULL`-typed array argument instead of raising an error. No breaking
API changes.

<!--
If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be
updated before approving the PR.
-->

<!--
If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api
change` label.
-->
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

functions Changes to functions implementation sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt)

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants