[GitHub] spark pull request #23239: [SPARK-26021][SQL][followup] only deal with NaN a...
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23239 --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] spark pull request #23239: [SPARK-26021][SQL][followup] only deal with NaN a...
Github user viirya commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23239#discussion_r239690045
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/java/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/codegen/UnsafeWriter.java
---
@@ -198,11 +198,45 @@ protected final void writeLong(long offset, long
value) {
Platform.putLong(getBuffer(), offset, value);
}
+ // We need to take care of NaN and -0.0 in several places:
+ // 1. When compare values, different NaNs should be treated as same,
`-0.0` and `0.0` should be
+ // treated as same.
+ // 2. In range partitioner, different NaNs should belong to the same
partition, -0.0 and 0.0
--- End diff --
As this is not a problem, we should update the PR description too.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] spark pull request #23239: [SPARK-26021][SQL][followup] only deal with NaN a...
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23239#discussion_r239507673
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/java/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/codegen/UnsafeWriter.java
---
@@ -198,11 +198,45 @@ protected final void writeLong(long offset, long
value) {
Platform.putLong(getBuffer(), offset, value);
}
+ // We need to take care of NaN and -0.0 in several places:
+ // 1. When compare values, different NaNs should be treated as same,
`-0.0` and `0.0` should be
+ // treated as same.
+ // 2. In range partitioner, different NaNs should belong to the same
partition, -0.0 and 0.0
--- End diff --
It turns out this is not a problem. The doc of `RangePartitioning` is
misleading. I'm updating the doc at https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23249
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] spark pull request #23239: [SPARK-26021][SQL][followup] only deal with NaN a...
Github user viirya commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23239#discussion_r239302780
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/java/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/codegen/UnsafeWriter.java
---
@@ -198,11 +198,45 @@ protected final void writeLong(long offset, long
value) {
Platform.putLong(getBuffer(), offset, value);
}
+ // We need to take care of NaN and -0.0 in several places:
+ // 1. When compare values, different NaNs should be treated as same,
`-0.0` and `0.0` should be
+ // treated as same.
+ // 2. In range partitioner, different NaNs should belong to the same
partition, -0.0 and 0.0
--- End diff --
Do we already have related test for case 2?
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] spark pull request #23239: [SPARK-26021][SQL][followup] only deal with NaN a...
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23239#discussion_r239256853
--- Diff: common/unsafe/src/main/java/org/apache/spark/unsafe/Platform.java
---
@@ -174,11 +174,6 @@ public static float getFloat(Object object, long
offset) {
}
public static void putFloat(Object object, long offset, float value) {
-if (Float.isNaN(value)) {
- value = Float.NaN;
-} else if (value == -0.0f) {
- value = 0.0f;
-}
--- End diff --
These change are expected to cause the following test case failure in
`PlatformUtilSuite`, but it seems to be missed. Could you fix the test case or
remove together, @cloud-fan ?
-
https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/common/unsafe/src/test/java/org/apache/spark/unsafe/PlatformUtilSuite.java#L162-L163
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] spark pull request #23239: [SPARK-26021][SQL][followup] only deal with NaN a...
GitHub user cloud-fan opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23239 [SPARK-26021][SQL][followup] only deal with NaN and -0.0 in UnsafeWriter ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? A followup of https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23043 There are 4 places we need to deal with NaN and -0.0: 1. Range partitioner(the sorter). `-0.0` and `0.0` should be assigned to the same partition. Different NaNs should be assigned to the same partition. 2. Join keys. `-0.0` and `0.0` should be treated as same. Different NaNs should be treated as same. 3. grouping keys. `-0.0` and `0.0` should be assigned to the same group. Different NaNs should be assigned to the same group. 4. comparison expressions. `-0.0` and `0.0` should be treated as same. Different NaNs should be treated as same. The case 4 is OK. Our comparison already handles NaN and -0.0, and for struct/array/map, we will recursively compare the fields/elements. Case 1, 2 and 3 are problematic, as they compare `UnsafeRow` binary directly, and different NaNs have different binary representation, and the same thing happens for -0.0 and 0.0. To fix it, a simple solution is: let `UnsafeProjection` always produce `UnsafeRow`s with NaN and -0.0 normalized(use the standard NaN and replace -0.0 with 0.0). The `UnsafeRow`s in case 1, 2 and 3 are all created by `UnsafeProjection`. Following this direction, this PR moves the handling of NaN and -0.0 from `Platform` to `UnsafeWriter`, so that places like `UnsafeRow.setFloat` will not handle them, which reduces the perf overhead. It's also easier to add comments explaining why we do it in `UnsafeWriter`. ## How was this patch tested? existing tests You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/cloud-fan/spark minor Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23239.patch To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch with (at least) the following in the commit message: This closes #23239 commit 797ade3eb175c41866efbffa3cb4c30f90e49ca7 Author: Wenchen Fan Date: 2018-12-05T15:05:39Z only deal with NaN and -0.0 in UnsafeWriter --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
