Github user hvanhovell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10374#discussion_r48020875
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/rows.scala
---
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ class GenericRow(protected[sql] val values: Array[Any])
extends Row {
override def toSeq: Seq[Any] = values.toSeq
- override def copy(): Row = this
+ override def copy(): Row = new GenericRow(values.clone())
--- End diff --
You cannot a put value back in the ```GenericRow``` when you have taken it
out, unless it is a mutable object. Could you provide an example for this?
Which is also a good basis for a unit test.
```copy``` is merely a contract all rows need to adhere to. If a row is
inmutable, why copy it? It also avoids a lot object allocations. I think
```GenericInternalRow``` should also return reference to it self on ```copy```.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
