fqaiser94 opened a new pull request #29322:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/29322
<!--
Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines:
https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html
2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR:
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html
3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g.,
'[WIP][SPARK-XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
4. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
5. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes.
6. If possible, provide a concise example to reproduce the issue for a
faster review.
7. If you want to add a new configuration, please read the guideline first
for naming configurations in
'core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/internal/config/ConfigEntry.scala'.
-->
### 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 `dropFields` method to the `Column` class.
This method should allow users to drop a `StructField` in a `StructType`
column (with similar semantics to the `drop` method on `Dataset`).
### 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 deeply nested data structure
which has a data 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 drop 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",
$"a.b.a.c"
).as("a"),
$"a.b.b",
$"a.b.c"
).as("b"),
$"a.c"
))
result.show(false)
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|a |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|[[1, 2, 3], [[4, 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 change. 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 method added in this PR, a user could simply do
something like this to get the same result:
```
val result = data.withColumn("a", 'a.dropFields("b.a.b"))
result.show(false)
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|a |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|[[1, 2, 3], [[4, 6], [7, 8, 9], [10, 11, 12]], [13, 14, 15]]|
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
```
This is the second of maybe 3 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
`withFieldRenamed`.
However, this should be added in a separate PR.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
<!--
Note that it means *any* user-facing change including all aspects such as
the documentation fix.
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 possible, please also clarify if this is a user-facing change compared to
the released Spark versions or within the unreleased branches such as master.
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:
More discussion on this topic can be found here:
- 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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
