[SPARK-34144][SQL][3.0] Exception thrown when trying to write LocalDate and Instant values to a table #31382
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
|
3.0 fix for SPARK-34144. Fix for master is still in review. |
|
ok to test |
HyukjinKwon
changed the title
|
Kubernetes integration test starting |
|
Kubernetes integration test status success |
|
Test build #134613 has finished for PR 31382 at commit
|
|
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed): |
|
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed): |
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Jan 29, 2021
|
Merged to branch-3.0. |
HyukjinKwon
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 29, 2021
…te and Instant values to a table ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? When writing rows to a table only the old date time API types are handled in org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils#makeSetter. If the new API is used (spark.sql.datetime.java8API.enabled=true) casting Instant and LocalDate to Timestamp and Date respectively fails. The proposed change is to handle Instant and LocalDate values and transform them to Timestamp and Date. ### Why are the changes needed? In the current state writing Instant or LocalDate values to a table fails with something like: Caused by: java.lang.ClassCastException: class java.time.LocalDate cannot be cast to class java.sql.Date (java.time.LocalDate is in module java.base of loader 'bootstrap'; java.sql.Date is in module java.sql of loader 'platform') at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$makeSetter$11(JdbcUtils.scala:573) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$makeSetter$11$adapted(JdbcUtils.scala:572) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.savePartition(JdbcUtils.scala:678) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$saveTable$1(JdbcUtils.scala:858) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$saveTable$1$adapted(JdbcUtils.scala:856) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.$anonfun$foreachPartition$2(RDD.scala:994) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.$anonfun$foreachPartition$2$adapted(RDD.scala:994) at org.apache.spark.SparkContext.$anonfun$runJob$5(SparkContext.scala:2139) at org.apache.spark.scheduler.ResultTask.runTask(ResultTask.scala:90) at org.apache.spark.scheduler.Task.run(Task.scala:127) at org.apache.spark.executor.Executor$TaskRunner.$anonfun$run$3(Executor.scala:446) at org.apache.spark.util.Utils$.tryWithSafeFinally(Utils.scala:1377) at org.apache.spark.executor.Executor$TaskRunner.run(Executor.scala:449) ... 3 more ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? No Closes #31382 from cristichircu/SPARK-34144_3_0. Lead-authored-by: Cristi Chircu <chircu@arezzosky.com> Co-authored-by: Cristi Chircu <cristian.chircu@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
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?
When writing rows to a table only the old date time API types are handled in org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils#makeSetter. If the new API is used (spark.sql.datetime.java8API.enabled=true) casting Instant and LocalDate to Timestamp and Date respectively fails. The proposed change is to handle Instant and LocalDate values and transform them to Timestamp and Date.
Why are the changes needed?
In the current state writing Instant or LocalDate values to a table fails with something like:
Caused by: java.lang.ClassCastException: class java.time.LocalDate cannot be cast to class java.sql.Date (java.time.LocalDate is in module java.base of loader 'bootstrap'; java.sql.Date is in module java.sql of loader 'platform') at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$makeSetter$11(JdbcUtils.scala:573) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$makeSetter$11$adapted(JdbcUtils.scala:572) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.savePartition(JdbcUtils.scala:678) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$saveTable$1(JdbcUtils.scala:858) at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JdbcUtils$.$anonfun$saveTable$1$adapted(JdbcUtils.scala:856) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.$anonfun$foreachPartition$2(RDD.scala:994) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.$anonfun$foreachPartition$2$adapted(RDD.scala:994) at org.apache.spark.SparkContext.$anonfun$runJob$5(SparkContext.scala:2139) at org.apache.spark.scheduler.ResultTask.runTask(ResultTask.scala:90) at org.apache.spark.scheduler.Task.run(Task.scala:127) at org.apache.spark.executor.Executor$TaskRunner.$anonfun$run$3(Executor.scala:446) at org.apache.spark.util.Utils$.tryWithSafeFinally(Utils.scala:1377) at org.apache.spark.executor.Executor$TaskRunner.run(Executor.scala:449) ... 3 more
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
No