Github user maropu commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#issuecomment-179135955
I agree that `CatalystScan` is used to support arithmetic operations in
datasources though, this current `CatalystScan` trait only processes filter
expressions. If we
Github user viirya commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#issuecomment-178978949
Is `PrunedFilteredScan` and `CatalystScan` conflicting? If not, can we keep
original `JDBCRelation` and let it implement `CatalystScan` too? In order not
to duplicate
GitHub user huaxingao opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005
[SPARK-12506][SPARK-12126][SQL]use CatalystScan for JDBCRelation
As suggested
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#issuecomment-178126949
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
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
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#discussion_r51493048
--- Diff: sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/jdbc/JDBCSuite.scala
---
@@ -455,31 +458,31 @@ class JDBCSuite extends SparkFunSuite
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#issuecomment-178233988
cc @liancheng
---
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
Github user maropu commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#discussion_r51531271
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/jdbc/JDBCRDD.scala
---
@@ -20,14 +20,15 @@ package
Github user maropu commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#issuecomment-178416552
Great work though, I think that we should consider lots of things to
refactor these kinds of datasource push-down codes because related tickets
(SPARK-12449, 12686,
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11005#issuecomment-178420517
As @maropu said, for me I also agree with him but some may think
differently as mentioned
