[SPARK-49114][SS][FOLLOWUP] Add missing error classes into json definition file#47690
Closed
riyaverm-db wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
Closed
Conversation
chaoqin-li1123
approved these changes
Aug 9, 2024
Contributor
Author
|
@HeartSaVioR requesting final review |
Member
|
Mind updating PR description? How does it affect the end users? |
Contributor
|
@HyukjinKwon I updated the PR description. Hope this clarifies the rationale of this PR. |
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Aug 12, 2024
Contributor
|
Thanks! Merging to master. |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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?
Follow up to SPARK-49114 (#47616). The PR added sub-categories of "cannot load state store errors", but it missed to add definition of error class into
error-conditions.jsonJSON file.Why are the changes needed?
Newly added error classes from #47616 will be dangling ones without this PR.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Yes, user will see the detailed error class to identify the issue better for the case of "cannot load state store" error.
How was this patch tested?
N/A
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.