Skip to content

COPY FROM s3: remove redundant non-null check from planning#35399

Merged
patrickwwbutler merged 1 commit intoMaterializeInc:mainfrom
patrickwwbutler:patrick/copy-from-nonnull-bug
Mar 10, 2026
Merged

COPY FROM s3: remove redundant non-null check from planning#35399
patrickwwbutler merged 1 commit intoMaterializeInc:mainfrom
patrickwwbutler:patrick/copy-from-nonnull-bug

Conversation

@patrickwwbutler
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Fixes a bug where if you have NON NULL columns in your target table, then you have to manually specify all columns, leading to clunk UX. The non null check here is redundant as we are validating every row during ingestion as well, so any null constraint violations would be caught there.

Motivation

Addresses a client question here

Verification

Added a new test case to testdrive to cover this

@patrickwwbutler patrickwwbutler requested a review from a team March 10, 2026 14:54
@patrickwwbutler patrickwwbutler requested a review from a team as a code owner March 10, 2026 14:54
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Mar 10, 2026

Thanks for opening this PR! Here are a few tips to help make the review process smooth for everyone.

PR title guidelines

  • Use imperative mood: "Fix X" not "Fixed X" or "Fixes X"
  • Be specific: "Fix panic in catalog sync when controller restarts" not "Fix bug" or "Update catalog code"
  • Prefix with area if helpful: compute: , storage: , adapter: , sql:

Pre-merge checklist

  • The PR title is descriptive and will make sense in the git log.
  • This PR has adequate test coverage / QA involvement has been duly considered. (trigger-ci for additional test/nightly runs)
  • If this PR includes major user-facing behavior changes, I have pinged the relevant PM to schedule a changelog post.
  • This PR has an associated up-to-date design doc, is a design doc (template), or is sufficiently small to not require a design.
  • If this PR evolves an existing $T ⇔ Proto$T mapping (possibly in a backwards-incompatible way), then it is tagged with a T-proto label.
  • If this PR will require changes to cloud orchestration or tests, there is a companion cloud PR to account for those changes that is tagged with the release-blocker label (example).

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ggevay ggevay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

(I have to say that I like this code going away. Trying to dig out this stuff from the MFP at this point of the pipeline seemed a bit sweaty.)

@patrickwwbutler patrickwwbutler enabled auto-merge (squash) March 10, 2026 15:06
@patrickwwbutler patrickwwbutler merged commit 566957b into MaterializeInc:main Mar 10, 2026
127 checks passed
antiguru pushed a commit to antiguru/materialize that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2026
…izeInc#35399)

Fixes a bug where if you have `NON NULL` columns in your target table,
then you have to manually specify all columns, leading to clunk UX. The
non null check here is redundant as we are validating every row during
ingestion as well, so any null constraint violations would be caught
there.

### Motivation

[Addresses a client question
here](https://materializeinc.slack.com/archives/C09DEL5PRL2/p1773150336885249?thread_ts=1773150318.948489&cid=C09DEL5PRL2)

### Verification

Added a new test case to testdrive to cover this
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.

2 participants