GH-43703: [C++][Parquet][CI] Parquet: Introducing more bad_data for testing

[mapleFU]

Rationale for this change

Introducing more bad_data for testing

What changes are included in this PR?

• Upgrade parquet-testing
• Introduce more bad_data
• Update fuzz generation

Are these changes tested?

They're tests :-)

Are there any user-facing changes?

no

• GitHub Issue: [C++][Parquet][CI] Seed corpus should also use bad data files #43703

[github-actions]

Thanks for opening a pull request!

If this is not a minor PR. Could you open an issue for this pull request on GitHub? https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/new/choose

Opening GitHub issues ahead of time contributes to the Openness of the Apache Arrow project.

Then could you also rename the pull request title in the following format?

GH-${GITHUB_ISSUE_ID}: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

or

MINOR: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

In the case of PARQUET issues on JIRA the title also supports:

PARQUET-${JIRA_ISSUE_ID}: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

See also:

• Other pull requests
• Contribution Guidelines - Contributing Overview

[pitrou]

Looks like there's a build failure on MSVC:
https://github.com/apache/arrow/actions/runs/10402488116/job/28807063898?pr=43708#step:9:1528

[github-actions]

⚠️ GitHub issue #43703 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

[mapleFU]

Fixed now

[pitrou]

@github-actions crossbow submit -g cpp

[github-actions]

Revision: 128df48

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-5197d794dc

Task	Status
test-alpine-linux-cpp
test-build-cpp-fuzz
test-conda-cpp
test-conda-cpp-valgrind
test-cuda-cpp
test-debian-12-cpp-amd64
test-debian-12-cpp-i386
test-fedora-39-cpp
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-bundled
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-minimal-with-formats
test-ubuntu-20.04-cpp-thread-sanitizer
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-20
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-emscripten
test-ubuntu-22.04-cpp-no-threading
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-13-bundled
test-ubuntu-24.04-cpp-gcc-14

[pitrou]

+1, thank you @mapleFU

[conbench-apache-arrow]

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 7 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit fb202ee.

There were 2 benchmark results indicating a performance regression:

• Commit Run on amd64-m5-4xlarge-linux at 2024-08-15 14:26:15Z
  • file-write (R) with compression=lz4, dataset=nyctaxi_2010-01, file_type=feather, input_type=dataframe, language=R
  • file-write (R) with compression=uncompressed, dataset=nyctaxi_2010-01, file_type=feather, input_type=dataframe, language=R

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 11 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.