[SPARK-24341][FOLLOWUP][DOCS] Add migration note for IN subqueries behavior#22469
Closed
mgaido91 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Closed
[SPARK-24341][FOLLOWUP][DOCS] Add migration note for IN subqueries behavior#22469mgaido91 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
mgaido91 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
cc @cloud-fan |
|
Test build #96258 has finished for PR 22469 at commit
|
cloud-fan
reviewed
Sep 19, 2018
docs/sql-programming-guide.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ## Upgrading From Spark SQL 2.3 to 2.4 | ||
|
|
||
| - Since Spark 2.4, when there is a struct field in front of the IN operator, the inner query must contain a struct field as well. In previous versions, instead, the fields of the struct were compared to the output of the inner query. Eg. if `a` is a `struct(a string, b int)`, in Spark 2.4 `a in (select (1 as a, 'a' as b) from range(1))` is a valid query, while `a in (select 1, 'a' from range(1))` is not. In previous version it was the opposite. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IN operator => IN operator before a subquery
Contributor
|
LGTM, thanks for adding it! |
Contributor
Author
|
thank you for pointing this out @cloud-fan |
|
Test build #96286 has finished for PR 22469 at commit
|
Contributor
|
thanks, merging to master/2.4! |
asfgit
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 20, 2018
…havior ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? The PR updates the migration guide in order to explain the changes introduced in the behavior of the IN operator with subqueries, in particular, the improved handling of struct attributes in these situations. ## How was this patch tested? NA Closes #22469 from mgaido91/SPARK-24341_followup. Authored-by: Marco Gaido <marcogaido91@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com> (cherry picked from commit 8aae49a) Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
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
3 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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
The PR updates the migration guide in order to explain the changes introduced in the behavior of the IN operator with subqueries, in particular, the improved handling of struct attributes in these situations.
How was this patch tested?
NA