GH-49497: [FlightRPC] Add is_update field to ActionCreatePreparedStatementResult#49498
Merged
Conversation
prmoore77
added a commit
to gizmodata/gizmosql-jdbc-driver
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
### Added - `DatabaseMetaData.getIndexInfo()` now returns real index rows (DuckDB backend), via the server's new `_gizmosql_system.main.gizmosql_index_info` catalog view (GizmoSQL v1.22.0) with inline-`duckdb_indexes()` fallback for older servers and a clear "SQLite backend not supported" error otherwise. - New non-standard `ArrowFlightConnection.getViewDefinition(cat, schema, v)` method for retrieving CREATE VIEW DDL text (same three-tier fallback). - `Statement.execute()` now reports a valid `getUpdateCount()` for INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE/DDL: `ArrowFlightMetaImpl.prepareAndExecute` sniffs the leading SQL keyword (with comment stripping) and routes DML through `DoPutCommandStatementUpdate`. Keyword set kept in sync with the ADBC Python driver. A TODO in source points at apache/arrow#49498 to adopt the authoritative `is_update` protocol field once it lands upstream. ### Tests - New unit tests in `ArrowFlightMetaImplTest` for the keyword heuristic. - New integration tests in `GizmoSqlIntegrationIT` for decimal round-trip, `getIndexInfo`, `getViewDefinition`, and DML update counts. - Upstream `ArrowDatabaseMetadataTest#testGetIndexInfo` (which asserted stock empty-result behavior) renamed to `testGetIndexInfoAgainstNonGizmosqlServerThrows` to match the new contract (driver now throws on non-GizmoSQL Flight SQL servers). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
Author
|
Now that the vote was approved, I moved this PR to ready for review. |
lidavidm
approved these changes
Jun 9, 2026
github-actions
Bot
added
awaiting merge
|
After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 4 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 2cd5ad2. There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉 The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 1 possible false positive for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rationale for this change
Multiple database driver APIs have functions that allow for executing prepared statements that can be either result set generating queries or update commands. Before this PR, there was no way for servers to indicate whether the query should be executed with
CommandPreparedStatementUpdateorCommandPreparedStatementQuery.What changes are included in this PR?
The change in this PR introduces a new field set by the server after creation of the prepared statement to indicate the proper network flow.
Are these changes tested?
No, because these changes are best tested using a database driver but this PR includes only changes to the proto definition.
Are there any user-facing changes?
No.