[SPARK-32090][SQL] Improve UserDefinedType.equal() to make it be symmetrical #28923
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
|
@cloud-fan @HyukjinKwon Please take a look, thanks! |
cloud-fan
reviewed
Jun 24, 2020
sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/UserDefinedTypeSuite.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Jun 24, 2020
|
Test build #124486 has finished for PR 28923 at commit
|
maropu
reviewed
Jun 25, 2020
sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/UserDefinedTypeSuite.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
LGTM except for the @cloud-fan comment. |
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Jun 25, 2020
|
Retest this please. |
dongjoon-hyun
approved these changes
Jun 27, 2020
|
Test build #124567 has finished for PR 28923 at commit
|
sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/UserDefinedTypeSuite.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
The PR title, |
Ngone51
changed the title
|
@dongjoon-hyun Updated the title, please take another look. |
|
Hi all, I've updated the PR according to your comments. Please take another look, thanks! |
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2020
dongjoon-hyun
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2020
|
Thank you, @Ngone51 and all. Today's 3 commits are only test case changes and I tested locally. The main body is already tested. Merged to master for Apache Spark 3.1.0. |
|
Test build #124617 has finished for PR 28923 at commit
|
|
thanks all!! |
maropu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 27, 2020
…etrical ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR fix `UserDefinedType.equal()` by comparing the UDT class instead of checking `acceptsType()`. ### Why are the changes needed? It's weird that equality comparison between two UDT types can have different result by switching the order: ```scala // ExampleSubTypeUDT.userClass is a subclass of ExampleBaseTypeUDT.userClass val udt1 = new ExampleBaseTypeUDT val udt2 = new ExampleSubTypeUDT println(udt1 == udt2) // true println(udt2 == udt1) // false ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? Yes. Before: ```scala // ExampleSubTypeUDT.userClass is a subclass of ExampleBaseTypeUDT.userClass val udt1 = new ExampleBaseTypeUDT val udt2 = new ExampleSubTypeUDT println(udt1 == udt2) // true println(udt2 == udt1) // false ``` After: ```scala // ExampleSubTypeUDT.userClass is a subclass of ExampleBaseTypeUDT.userClass val udt1 = new ExampleBaseTypeUDT val udt2 = new ExampleSubTypeUDT println(udt1 == udt2) // false println(udt2 == udt1) // false ``` ### How was this patch tested? Added a unit test. Closes #28923 from Ngone51/fix-udt-equal. Authored-by: yi.wu <yi.wu@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
maropu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 27, 2020
…etrical ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR fix `UserDefinedType.equal()` by comparing the UDT class instead of checking `acceptsType()`. ### Why are the changes needed? It's weird that equality comparison between two UDT types can have different result by switching the order: ```scala // ExampleSubTypeUDT.userClass is a subclass of ExampleBaseTypeUDT.userClass val udt1 = new ExampleBaseTypeUDT val udt2 = new ExampleSubTypeUDT println(udt1 == udt2) // true println(udt2 == udt1) // false ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? Yes. Before: ```scala // ExampleSubTypeUDT.userClass is a subclass of ExampleBaseTypeUDT.userClass val udt1 = new ExampleBaseTypeUDT val udt2 = new ExampleSubTypeUDT println(udt1 == udt2) // true println(udt2 == udt1) // false ``` After: ```scala // ExampleSubTypeUDT.userClass is a subclass of ExampleBaseTypeUDT.userClass val udt1 = new ExampleBaseTypeUDT val udt2 = new ExampleSubTypeUDT println(udt1 == udt2) // false println(udt2 == udt1) // false ``` ### How was this patch tested? Added a unit test. Closes #28923 from Ngone51/fix-udt-equal. Authored-by: yi.wu <yi.wu@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
|
I've backported this into branch-3.0/2.4. For the reason, please see: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/30157/files#r512494277 |
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?
This PR fix
UserDefinedType.equal()by comparing the UDT class instead of checkingacceptsType().Why are the changes needed?
It's weird that equality comparison between two UDT types can have different result by switching the order:
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Yes.
Before:
After:
How was this patch tested?
Added a unit test.