Skip to content

[SPARK-30085][SQL][DOC] Standardize sql reference#26721

Closed
huaxingao wants to merge 4 commits intoapache:masterfrom
huaxingao:spark-30085
Closed

[SPARK-30085][SQL][DOC] Standardize sql reference#26721
huaxingao wants to merge 4 commits intoapache:masterfrom
huaxingao:spark-30085

Conversation

@huaxingao
Copy link
Contributor

@huaxingao huaxingao commented Nov 30, 2019

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Standardize sql reference

Why are the changes needed?

To have consistent docs

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

Yes

How was this patch tested?

Tested using jykyll build --serve

@huaxingao
Copy link
Contributor Author

I know there are other inconsistencies. I will fix one by one.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 30, 2019

Test build #114645 has finished for PR 26721 at commit 563f6e1.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

Copy link
Member

@srowen srowen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks directionally fine, ping when you're ready.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Dec 1, 2019

Test build #114676 has finished for PR 26721 at commit ec1eac8.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@huaxingao
Copy link
Contributor Author

@srowen @dilipbiswal
I have the following changes:

  1. use the same table_identifier syntax for all the commands that use table_identifier
  2. use the same view_identifier syntax for all the commands that use view_identifier
  3. use the same partition_spec syntax for all the commands that use partition_spec
  4. some of the commands have a space in between of the braces and text. Some of them don't. I make it consistent to have a space
  5. remove ; from the end of the sql syntax

There may be other inconsistencies. If I find more later, I will open a separate PR to fix the problems.

<dd>The name of the table to be cached.</dd>
<dt><code><em>table_identifier</em></code></dt>
<dd>
Specifies a table name, which may be optionally qualified with a database name.<br><br>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@huaxingao Here, can we try and retain the original description ? How about :

Specifies the table name to be cached. A table name may be optionally qualified with a database name.

<dd>The name of the table or view to be uncached.</dd>
<dt><code><em>table_identifier</em></code></dt>
<dd>
Specifies a table name, which may be optionally qualified with a database name.<br><br>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@huaxingao Same comment as above.

<dt><code><em>table_identifier</em></code></dt>
<dd>
Specifies a table name, which is either a qualified or unqualified name that designates a table/view. If no database identifier is provided, it refers to a temporary view or a table/view in the current database.<br><br>
Specifies a table name, which may be optionally qualified with a database name.<br><br>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@huaxingao ditto as above..

partitions. When specified, the partitions that match the partition spec are returned.</dd>
<dt><code><em>partition_spec</em></code></dt>
<dd>
An optional parameter that specifies a comma separated list of key and value pairs
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@huaxingao ditto as above.

<dd>
Specifies partition column and its value which is exists in the table. Note that a table regex
cannot be used with a partition specification..
An optional parameter that specifies a comma separated list of key and value pairs
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@huaxingao here there is a mention about mutual exclusivity between the LIKE pattern and partition spec. Can we mention it here as well ?

<dd>Specifies the partition on which the property has to be set.</dd>
<dt><code><em>partition_spec</em></code></dt>
<dd>
An optional parameter that specifies a comma separated list of key and value pairs
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@huaxingao same ..

@dilipbiswal
Copy link
Contributor

@huaxingao Looks good to me. Please take a look at some minor comments.
Thanks a lot for doing it.

@huaxingao huaxingao changed the title [SPARK-30085][SQL][DOC] Standardize partition spec in sql reference [SPARK-30085][SQL][DOC] Standardize sql reference Dec 1, 2019
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Dec 1, 2019

Test build #114686 has finished for PR 26721 at commit 2b31b68.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@dilipbiswal
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@srowen
Copy link
Member

srowen commented Dec 2, 2019

Merged to master

@srowen srowen closed this in babefde Dec 2, 2019
@huaxingao
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks! @srowen @dilipbiswal

@huaxingao huaxingao deleted the spark-30085 branch December 2, 2019 16:15
attilapiros pushed a commit to attilapiros/spark that referenced this pull request Dec 6, 2019
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Standardize sql reference

### Why are the changes needed?
To have consistent docs

### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Yes

### How was this patch tested?
Tested using jykyll build --serve

Closes apache#26721 from huaxingao/spark-30085.

Authored-by: Huaxin Gao <huaxing@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <sean.owen@databricks.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants