[SPARK-35411][SQL][FOLLOWUP] Handle Currying Product while serializing TreeNode to JSON #32713
+32
−1
Conversation
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
Contributor
Author
|
Hit a failed UT which would handle CachedRDDBuilder after backporting #32557 to spark 2.4. |
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
cloud-fan
approved these changes
May 31, 2021
Contributor
|
thanks, merging to master/3.1! |
cloud-fan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2021
…g TreeNode to JSON ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Handle Currying Product while serializing TreeNode to JSON. While processing [Product](https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/v3.1.2/sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/trees/TreeNode.scala#L820), we may get an assert error for cases like Currying Product because of the mismatch of sizes between field name and field values. Fallback to use reflection to get all the values for constructor parameters when we meet such cases. ### Why are the changes needed? Avoid throwing error while serializing TreeNode to JSON, try to output as much information as possible. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? New UT case added. Closes #32713 from ivoson/SPARK-35411-followup. Authored-by: Tengfei Huang <tengfei.h@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks for reviewing. @cloud-fan |
flyrain
pushed a commit
to flyrain/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 21, 2021
…g TreeNode to JSON ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Handle Currying Product while serializing TreeNode to JSON. While processing [Product](https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/v3.1.2/sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/trees/TreeNode.scala#L820), we may get an assert error for cases like Currying Product because of the mismatch of sizes between field name and field values. Fallback to use reflection to get all the values for constructor parameters when we meet such cases. ### Why are the changes needed? Avoid throwing error while serializing TreeNode to JSON, try to output as much information as possible. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? New UT case added. Closes apache#32713 from ivoson/SPARK-35411-followup. Authored-by: Tengfei Huang <tengfei.h@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
fishcus
pushed a commit
to fishcus/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 12, 2022
…g TreeNode to JSON ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Handle Currying Product while serializing TreeNode to JSON. While processing [Product](https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/v3.1.2/sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/trees/TreeNode.scala#L820), we may get an assert error for cases like Currying Product because of the mismatch of sizes between field name and field values. Fallback to use reflection to get all the values for constructor parameters when we meet such cases. ### Why are the changes needed? Avoid throwing error while serializing TreeNode to JSON, try to output as much information as possible. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? New UT case added. Closes apache#32713 from ivoson/SPARK-35411-followup. Authored-by: Tengfei Huang <tengfei.h@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
otterc
pushed a commit
to linkedin/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2023
…g TreeNode to JSON Handle Currying Product while serializing TreeNode to JSON. While processing [Product](https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/v3.1.2/sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/trees/TreeNode.scala#L820), we may get an assert error for cases like Currying Product because of the mismatch of sizes between field name and field values. Fallback to use reflection to get all the values for constructor parameters when we meet such cases. Avoid throwing error while serializing TreeNode to JSON, try to output as much information as possible. No New UT case added. Closes apache#32713 from ivoson/SPARK-35411-followup. Authored-by: Tengfei Huang <tengfei.h@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com> (cherry picked from commit ea7016f) RB=3333473 BUG=LIHADOOP-63952 G=spark-reviewers R=ekrogen,tgudivad A=ekrogen,tgudivad
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?
Handle Currying Product while serializing TreeNode to JSON. While processing Product, we may get an assert error for cases like Currying Product because of the mismatch of sizes between field name and field values.
Fallback to use reflection to get all the values for constructor parameters when we meet such cases.
Why are the changes needed?
Avoid throwing error while serializing TreeNode to JSON, try to output as much information as possible.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
New UT case added.