MINOR: [Docs] Clarify inlined strings in VariableLengthStringView is padded with 0

[alamb]

Rationale for this change

While implementing Variable-size Binary View Layout (thanks @ariesdevil !) in apache/arrow-rs#5481 it was not 100% clear if the inlined string was zero padded.

@bkietz noted that

The spec does say "padded with zero" https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/main/docs/source/format/Columnar.rst?plain=1#L384 but it could be repeated in the surrounding paragraph. In any case, padded with zero is definitely the intent

    * Short strings, length <= 12
      | Bytes 0-3  | Bytes 4-15                            |
      |------------|---------------------------------------|
      | length     | data (padded with 0)                  |

What changes are included in this PR?

Add a sentence in the surrounding text to make it clear the inlined strings values are zero padded

Note I do not think this is a specification change (and therefore doesn't need a vote on the mailing list) as the spec already specifies the padding is zero (in the diagram). This simply clarifies the text to emphasize this point for ease of understanding

Are these changes tested?

Are there any user-facing changes?

[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

[kou]

+1

[alamb]

Thank you for the review @kou

[conbench-apache-arrow]

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 5 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit bd3fab4.

There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 2 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.