[SPARK-47490][SS] Fix RocksDB Logger constructor use to avoid deprecation warning #45616
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
anishshri-db
changed the title
|
@HeartSaVioR @sahnib - PTAL, thx ! |
sweisdb
pushed a commit
to sweisdb/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2024
…tion warning
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Fix RocksDB Logger constructor use to avoid deprecation warning
### Why are the changes needed?
With the latest RocksDB upgrade, the Logger constructor used was deprecated which was throwing a compiler warning.
```
[warn] val dbLogger = new Logger(dbOptions) {
[warn] ^
[warn] one warning found
[warn] two warnings found
[info] compiling 36 Scala sources and 16 Java sources to /Users/anish.shrigondekar/spark/spark/sql/core/target/scala-2.13/classes ...
[warn] -target is deprecated: Use -release instead to compile against the correct platform API.
[warn] Applicable -Wconf / nowarn filters for this warning: msg=<part of the message>, cat=deprecation
[warn] /Users/anish.shrigondekar/spark/spark/sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/streaming/state/RocksDB.scala:851:24: constructor Logger in class Logger is deprecated
[warn] Applicable -Wconf / nowarn filters for this warning: msg=<part of the message>, cat=deprecation, site=org.apache.spark.sql.execution.streaming.state.RocksDB.createLogger.dbLogger, origin=org.rocksdb.Logger.<init>
```
Updated to use the new recommendation as mentioned here - https://javadoc.io/doc/org.rocksdb/rocksdbjni/latest/org/rocksdb/Logger.html
Recommendation:
```
[Logger](https://javadoc.io/static/org.rocksdb/rocksdbjni/8.11.3/org/rocksdb/Logger.html#Logger-org.rocksdb.DBOptions-)([DBOptions](https://javadoc.io/static/org.rocksdb/rocksdbjni/8.11.3/org/rocksdb/DBOptions.html) dboptions)
Deprecated.
Use [Logger(InfoLogLevel)](https://javadoc.io/static/org.rocksdb/rocksdbjni/8.11.3/org/rocksdb/Logger.html#Logger-org.rocksdb.InfoLogLevel-) instead, e.g. new Logger(dbOptions.infoLogLevel()).
```
After the fix, the warning is not seen.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No
### How was this patch tested?
Existing unit tests
### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No
Closes apache#45616 from anishshri-db/task/SPARK-47490.
Authored-by: Anish Shrigondekar <anish.shrigondekar@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.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?
Fix RocksDB Logger constructor use to avoid deprecation warning
Why are the changes needed?
With the latest RocksDB upgrade, the Logger constructor used was deprecated which was throwing a compiler warning.
Updated to use the new recommendation as mentioned here - https://javadoc.io/doc/org.rocksdb/rocksdbjni/latest/org/rocksdb/Logger.html
Recommendation:
After the fix, the warning is not seen.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Existing unit tests
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No