UPDATE: Sorry I just missed the PR (
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28026). I still think it'd be nice to
avoid recycling the JIRA issue which was resolved before. Shall we have a
new JIRA issue with linking to SPARK-30098, and set proper priority?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 7:59 AM Jungtaek Lim <kabhwan.opensou...@gmail.com>

> Would it be better to prioritize this to make sure the change is included
> in Spark 3.0? (Maybe filing an issue and set as a blocker)
> Looks like there's consensus that SPARK-30098 brought ambiguous issue
> which should be fixed (though the consideration of severity seems to be
> different), and once we notice the issue it would be really odd if we
> publish it as it is, and try to fix it later (the fix may not be even
> included in 3.0.x as it might bring behavioral change).
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:37 PM Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Ryan,
>> It's great to hear that you are cleaning up this long-standing mess.
>> Please let me know if you hit any problems that I can help with.
>> Thanks,
>> Wenchen
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 3:16 AM Nicholas Chammas <
>> nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 3:46 AM Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 2. PARTITIONED BY colTypeList: I think we can support it in the
>>>> unified syntax. Just make sure it doesn't appear together with PARTITIONED
>>>> BY transformList.
>>> Another side note: Perhaps as part of (or after) unifying the CREATE
>>> TABLE syntax, we can also update Catalog.createTable() to support
>>> creating partitioned tables
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-31001>.

Reply via email to