[SPARK-37486][SQL][HIVE] set the ContextClassLoader before using the addJars in HiveClient

[kevincmchen]

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

In HiveSessionResourceLoader, call the function addJars of its supper class firstly and set the contextClassLoader in current thread, and then use the addJars in HiveClient. to avoid that different class loaders load the same class.

Why are the changes needed?

when using livy to execute sql statements that will use the udf jars located in lakefs, a inner filesystem in Tencent Cloud DLC. it will threw the following exceptions:

java.lang.LinkageError: loader constraint violation: loader (instance of sun/misc/Launcher$AppClassLoader) previously initiated loading for a different type with name

Maybe it happens in some other filesystem.

This PR fix the bug by setting the setContextClassLoader before using the addJars in HiveClient

Why are the changes needed?

fix the bug that different class loaders load the same class.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

NO

How was this patch tested?

existing testsuites

[AmplabJenkins]

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

[HyukjinKwon]

@kevincmchen mind filing a JIRA? see also https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html

[kevincmchen]

@kevincmchen mind filing a JIRA? see also https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html

@HyukjinKwon ok, i have created a issue about the PR and you can get the details about the bug.

[LuciferYang]

I'm not sure if there is a counterexample that needs to call client.addJar first

[kevincmchen]

I'm not sure if there is a counterexample that needs to call client.addJar first

I don't think supper.addJars and client.addJars are strongly dependent.
the reason why i call the supper.addJars first is to set the ContextClassLoader of current thread, to avoid that different class loaders load the same class in HiveClient。 @LuciferYang

[LuciferYang]

Thank you for your explanation. If you are sure it will not affect the old case, I think this change is OK

[kevincmchen]

Thank you for your explanation. If you are sure it will not affect the old case, I think this change is OK

ok, thx

[kevincmchen]

@HyukjinKwon Could you please review the code and merge it?