[SPARK-55171][PYTHON] Fix memory profiler on iter UDF #53954
Closed
+39
−5
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
JIRA Issue Information=== Bug SPARK-55171 === This comment was automatically generated by GitHub Actions |
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Jan 25, 2026
Member
|
Merged to master. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
For iter based UDF, we use the function
fdirectly for memory profiler to track. However, functionfmight not be the function that we need to track. It could just return another generator. We should use the return value fromf()and use that code object.Why are the changes needed?
For Python data source, we can't track the correct function. It's also possible that users use similar structure which we can't track.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
A new test is added which failed before fix and passed after.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.