fqaiser94 opened a new pull request #27066: [SPARK-22231][SQL] Add withField 
method to Column class
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/27066
 
 
   ### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
   <!--
   Please clarify what changes you are proposing. The purpose of this section 
is to outline the changes and how this PR fixes the issue. 
   If possible, please consider writing useful notes for better and faster 
reviews in your PR. See the examples below.
     1. If you refactor some codes with changing classes, showing the class 
hierarchy will help reviewers.
     2. If you fix some SQL features, you can provide some references of other 
DBMSes.
     3. If there is design documentation, please add the link.
     4. If there is a discussion in the mailing list, please add the link.
   -->
   Added a new `withField` method to the `Column` class. This method should 
allow users to add or replace a `StructField` in a `StructType` column (much 
like how the `withColumn` method on the `Dataset` class operates). 
   
   
   ### Why are the changes needed?
   <!--
   Please clarify why the changes are needed. For instance,
     1. If you propose a new API, clarify the use case for a new API.
     2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
   -->
   Often Spark users have to work with deeply nested data e.g. to fix a data 
quality issue with an existing `StructField`. To do this with the existing 
Spark APIs, users have to rebuild the entire struct column. 
   
   For example, let's say you have the following data which has a quality issue 
(`5` is missing): 
   ```
   import org.apache.spark.sql._
   import org.apache.spark.sql.functions._
   import org.apache.spark.sql.types._
   
   val data = spark.createDataFrame(sc.parallelize(
         Seq(Row(Row(Row(1, 2, 3), Row(Row(4, null, 6), Row(7, 8, 9), Row(10, 
11, 12)), Row(13, 14, 15))))),
         StructType(Seq(
           StructField("a", StructType(Seq(
             StructField("a", StructType(Seq(
               StructField("a", IntegerType),
               StructField("b", IntegerType),
               StructField("c", IntegerType)))),
             StructField("b", StructType(Seq(
               StructField("a", StructType(Seq(
                 StructField("a", IntegerType),
                 StructField("b", IntegerType),
                 StructField("c", IntegerType)))),
               StructField("b", StructType(Seq(
                 StructField("a", IntegerType),
                 StructField("b", IntegerType),
                 StructField("c", IntegerType)))), 
               StructField("c", StructType(Seq(
                 StructField("a", IntegerType),
                 StructField("b", IntegerType),
                 StructField("c", IntegerType))))
             ))), 
             StructField("c", StructType(Seq(
               StructField("a", IntegerType),
               StructField("b", IntegerType),
               StructField("c", IntegerType))))
           )))))).cache
   
   data.show(false)
   +---------------------------------+                                          
   
   |a                                |
   +---------------------------------+
   |[[1, 2, 3], [[4,, 6], [7, 8, 9]]]|
   +---------------------------------+
   ```
   Currently, to replace the missing value users would have to do something 
like this: 
   ```
   val result = data.withColumn("a", 
     struct(
       $"a.a", 
       struct(
         struct(
           $"a.b.a.a", 
           lit(5).as("b"), 
           $"a.b.a.c"
         ).as("a"), 
         $"a.b.b", 
         $"a.b.c"
       ).as("b"), 
       $"a.c"
     ))
   
   result.show(false)
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+
   |a                                                              |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+
   |[[1, 2, 3], [[4, 5, 6], [7, 8, 9], [10, 11, 12]], [13, 14, 15]]|
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+
   ```
   As you can see above, with the existing methods users must call the `struct` 
function and list all fields, including fields they don't want to manipulate. 
This is not ideal as: 
   >this leads to complex, fragile code that cannot survive schema evolution. 
   [SPARK-16483](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-16483)
   
   In contrast, with the methods added in this PR, a user could simply do 
something like this: 
   ```
   val result = data.withColumn("a", 'a.withField(
     "b", $"a.b".withField(
       "a", $"a.b.a".withField(
         "b", lit(5)))))
   
   result.show(false)
   +-----------------------------------+
   |a                                  |
   +-----------------------------------+
   |[[1, 2, 3], [[4, 5, 6], [7, 8, 9]]]|
   +-----------------------------------+
   ```
   This is shorter, and more importantly can survive schema evolution. You 
could even further condense this code with a simple utility function: 
   ```
   ```
   This is the first of maybe a few methods that could be added to the `Column` 
class to make it easier to manipulate nested data. Other methods under 
discussion in [SPARK-22231](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-22231) 
include `drop` and `renameField`. However, these should be added in a separate 
PR. 
   
   ### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
   <!--
   If yes, please clarify the previous behavior and the change this PR proposes 
- provide the console output, description and/or an example to show the 
behavior difference if possible.
   If no, write 'No'.
   -->
   No. 
   
   ### How was this patch tested?
   <!--
   If tests were added, say they were added here. Please make sure to add some 
test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive 
cases if possible.
   If it was tested in a way different from regular unit tests, please clarify 
how you tested step by step, ideally copy and paste-able, so that other 
reviewers can test and check, and descendants can verify in the future.
   If tests were not added, please describe why they were not added and/or why 
it was difficult to add.
   -->
   New unit tests were added. Jenkins must pass them. 
   
   ### Related JIRAs: 
   - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-22231
   - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-16483

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


With regards,
Apache Git Services

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to