[SPARK-34577][SQL][FOLLOWUP] Add change of DESC NAMESPACE's schema to migration guide
#32155
Conversation
…to migration guide to
|
FYI @cloud-fan |
|
Test build #137315 has finished for PR 32155 at commit
|
|
Kubernetes integration test unable to build dist. exiting with code: 1 |
docs/sql-migration-guide.md
Outdated
| @@ -75,6 +75,8 @@ license: | | |||
|
|
|||
| - In Spark 3.2, `CREATE TABLE .. LIKE ..` command can not use reserved properties. You need their specific clauses to specify them, for example, `CREATE TABLE test1 LIKE test LOCATION 'some path'`. You can set `spark.sql.legacy.notReserveProperties` to `true` to ignore the `ParseException`, in this case, these properties will be silently removed, for example: `TBLPROPERTIES('owner'='yao')` will have no effect. In Spark version 3.1 and below, the reserved properties can be used in `CREATE TABLE .. LIKE ..` command but have no side effects, for example, `TBLPROPERTIES('location'='/tmp')` does not change the location of the table but only create a headless property just like `'a'='b'`. | |||
|
|
|||
| - In Spark 3.2, the output schema of `DESCRIBE NAMESPACE` becomes `info_name: string, info_value: string`. In Spark 3.1 or earlier, the `info_name` field was named `database_description_item` and the `info_value` field was named `database_description_value` for the builtin catalog. To restore the old schema with the builtin catalog, you can set `spark.sql.legacy.keepCommandOutputSchema` to `true`. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: can we put the items for legacy command output schema close to each other?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: can we put the items for legacy command output schema close to each other?
Done and move SHOW TBLPROPERTIES close too.
|
Test build #137324 has finished for PR 32155 at commit
|
|
Kubernetes integration test starting |
|
Kubernetes integration test status failure |
|
thanks, merging to master! |
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Add change of
DESC NAMESPACE's schema to migration guideWhy are the changes needed?
Update doc
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Not need