Github user HyukjinKwon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22295#discussion_r224983406
--- Diff: python/pyspark/sql/functions.py ---
@@ -2633,6 +2633,23 @@ def sequence(start, stop, step=None):
_to_java_column(start), _to_java_column(stop),
_to_java_column(step)))
+@since(3.0)
+def getActiveSession():
+ """
+ Returns the active SparkSession for the current thread
+ """
+ from pyspark.sql import SparkSession
+ sc = SparkContext._active_spark_context
--- End diff --
Yea, we should match the behaviour with Scala side - that was my point
essentially. The problem about the previous approach was that session was being
handled within Python - I believe we will basically reuse JVM's session
implementation rather than reimplementing the seperate Python session support
within PySpark side.
> What about if sc isNone we just return Nonesince we can't have an
activeSession without an active SparkContext -- does that sound reasonable?
In that case, I think we should follow Scala's behaviour.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
