[SPARK-17609][SQL] SessionCatalog.tableExists should not check temp view #15160
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Test build #65654 has finished for PR 15160 at commit
|
gatorsmile
reviewed
Sep 20, 2016
| if (ignoreIfExists) { | ||
| return Seq.empty[Row] | ||
| } else { | ||
| throw new AnalysisException(s"Table ${tableIdentWithDB.unquotedString} already exists.") | ||
| throw new AnalysisException(s"Table ${table.identifier.unquotedString} already exists.") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The test failure is caused by this change. After this PR, table.identifier does not always have the database name.
|
LGTM, except one comment about test failure. Also, went over all the existing usages of |
|
Test build #65715 has finished for PR 15160 at commit
|
|
Test build #65719 has finished for PR 15160 at commit
|
|
LGTM |
|
thanks for the review, merging to master! |
asfgit
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2016
…tements on Temporary Views ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR is to backport #15054 and #15160 to Spark 2.0. - When the permanent tables/views do not exist but the temporary view exists, the expected error should be `NoSuchTableException` for partition-related ALTER TABLE commands. However, it always reports a confusing error message. For example, ``` Partition spec is invalid. The spec (a, b) must match the partition spec () defined in table '`testview`'; ``` - When the permanent tables/views do not exist but the temporary view exists, the expected error should be `NoSuchTableException` for `ALTER TABLE ... UNSET TBLPROPERTIES`. However, it reports a missing table property. For example, ``` Attempted to unset non-existent property 'p' in table '`testView`'; ``` - When `ANALYZE TABLE` is called on a view or a temporary view, we should issue an error message. However, it reports a strange error: ``` ANALYZE TABLE is not supported for Project ``` - When inserting into a temporary view that is generated from `Range`, we will get the following error message: ``` assertion failed: No plan for 'InsertIntoTable Range (0, 10, step=1, splits=Some(1)), false, false +- Project [1 AS 1#20] +- OneRowRelation$ ``` This PR is to fix the above four issues. There is no place in Spark SQL that need `SessionCatalog.tableExists` to check temp views, so this PR makes `SessionCatalog.tableExists` only check permanent table/view and removes some hacks. ### How was this patch tested? Added multiple test cases Author: gatorsmile <gatorsmile@gmail.com> Closes #15174 from gatorsmile/PR15054Backport.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
After #15054 , there is no place in Spark SQL that need
SessionCatalog.tableExiststo check temp views, so this PR makesSessionCatalog.tableExistsonly check permanent table/view and removes some hacks.This PR also improves the
getTempViewOrPermanentTableMetadatathat is introduced in #15054 , to make the code simpler.How was this patch tested?
existing tests