LuciferYang commented on code in PR #44074:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/44074#discussion_r1409781928
##########
sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/SparkSessionExtensionSuite.scala:
##########
@@ -516,6 +518,33 @@ class SparkSessionExtensionSuite extends SparkFunSuite
with SQLHelper with Adapt
}
}
}
+
+ test("SPARK-46170: Support inject adaptive query post planner strategy rules
in " +
+ "SparkSessionExtensions") {
+ val extensions = create { extensions =>
+ extensions.injectQueryPostPlannerStrategyRule(_ =>
MyQueryPostPlannerStrategyRule)
+ }
+ withSession(extensions) { session =>
+
assert(session.sessionState.adaptiveRulesHolder.queryPostPlannerStrategyRules
+ .contains(MyQueryPostPlannerStrategyRule))
+ import session.sqlContext.implicits._
+ withSQLConf(SQLConf.SHUFFLE_PARTITIONS.key -> "3",
+ SQLConf.COALESCE_PARTITIONS_ENABLED.key -> "false") {
+ val input = Seq((10), (20), (10)).toDF("c1")
+ val df = input.groupBy("c1").count()
+ df.collect()
+ assert(df.rdd.partitions.length == 1)
+ assert(find(df.queryExecution.executedPlan) {
+ case s: ShuffleExchangeExec if s.outputPartitioning ==
SinglePartition => true
Review Comment:
How about `case s: ShuffleExchangeExec => s.outputPartitioning ==
SinglePartition`
Additionally, a personal opinion unrelated to this pr: If there is an
`exists` function in `AdaptiveSparkPlanHelper,` would this assertion be simpler
to write?
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
