[SPARK-47145][SQL] Pass table identifier to row data source scan exec for V2 strategy. #45200
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
urosstan-db
changed the title
cloud-fan
reviewed
Feb 27, 2024
...core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/v2/DataSourceV2Strategy.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
urosstan-db
force-pushed
the
pass-table-identifier-to-datasourcescan-v2
branch
from
43ff70b
to
d142e15
Compare
urosstan-db
commented
Feb 27, 2024
...core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/v2/DataSourceV2Strategy.scala
Show resolved
Hide resolved
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Feb 27, 2024
|
thanks, merging to master! |
TakawaAkirayo
pushed a commit
to TakawaAkirayo/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 4, 2024
… for V2 strategy ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Provide table identifier to RowDataSourceScanExec physical plan node in DataSourceV2Strategy. Table identifier is taken from DataSourceV2Relation. ### Why are the changes needed? It is better to populate all available fields. Table identifier can be useful for other purposes (logging, debugging, etc) ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? There was not any testing, only debugging manually to see whether it is populated properly. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes apache#45200 from urosstan-db/pass-table-identifier-to-datasourcescan-v2. Authored-by: Uros Stankovic <uros.stankovic@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
ericm-db
pushed a commit
to ericm-db/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2024
… for V2 strategy ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Provide table identifier to RowDataSourceScanExec physical plan node in DataSourceV2Strategy. Table identifier is taken from DataSourceV2Relation. ### Why are the changes needed? It is better to populate all available fields. Table identifier can be useful for other purposes (logging, debugging, etc) ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? There was not any testing, only debugging manually to see whether it is populated properly. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes apache#45200 from urosstan-db/pass-table-identifier-to-datasourcescan-v2. Authored-by: Uros Stankovic <uros.stankovic@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
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?
Provide table identifier to RowDataSourceScanExec physical plan node in DataSourceV2Strategy.
Table identifier is taken from DataSourceV2Relation.
Why are the changes needed?
It is better to populate all available fields. Table identifier can be useful for other purposes (logging, debugging, etc)
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
There was not any testing, only debugging manually to see whether it is populated properly.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No