rdblue commented on a change in pull request #23848: [SPARK-26946][SQL]
Identifiers for multi-catalog
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23848#discussion_r267954864
##########
File path:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
##########
@@ -95,13 +96,19 @@ object AnalysisContext {
class Analyzer(
catalog: SessionCatalog,
conf: SQLConf,
- maxIterations: Int)
- extends RuleExecutor[LogicalPlan] with CheckAnalysis {
+ maxIterations: Int,
+ override val lookupCatalog: Option[(String) => CatalogPlugin] = None)
+ extends RuleExecutor[LogicalPlan] with CheckAnalysis with LookupCatalog {
def this(catalog: SessionCatalog, conf: SQLConf) = {
this(catalog, conf, conf.optimizerMaxIterations)
}
+ def this(lookupCatalog: Option[(String) => CatalogPlugin], catalog:
SessionCatalog,
Review comment:
@cloud-fan, I think this commit is reasonably self-contained. Nit-picking
about whether a constructor is added in this commit or the next isn't adding
much value.
Keep in mind that we make commits self-contained to decrease conflicts and
increase the rate at which we can review and accept patches. Is putting this in
the next commit really worth the time it takes to change and test that change,
if it means that this work is delayed another day?
----------------------------------------------------------------
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]
