Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-157208292
Can we close this now that #9216 is merged?
---
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 gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-157239704
Sure. Close it. Thank you for your time!
---
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 gatorsmile closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385
---
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
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-156730810
@marmbrus CachedTableSuite failed due to the same reason. We did not clean
up the subquery names. Thus, it is unable to give a correct result when
deciding if
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-156612181
Hi, @marmbrus
Originally, I thought quantifiers are part of identifiers, like schema name
in traditional RDBMS. Based on your explanation, this is not true.
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-156238962
I'm sorry, I don't see where this `expand()` function you are talking about
is, or why it should not use `semanticEquals`. The whole point of
`semanticEquals` is "are
Github user gatorsmile closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385
---
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
GitHub user gatorsmile reopened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385
[SPARK-11433] [SQL] Cleanup the subquery name after eliminating subquery
This fix is to remove the subquery name in qualifiers after eliminating
subquery.
You can merge this pull request
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-155605985
@marmbrus
After rechecking the root reason why Expand failed, I still think we should
cleanup the subquery name after subquery elimination. My current fix
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-15565
Hi, @marmbrus
After digging the root reason why Expand cases failed, I found we still
need a deeper clean of subquery after elimination.
Let me
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-154594596
Thanks for your contribution, but I'm tempted to not make this change
unless there is actually a bug. We are eliminating the subqueries because they
will impact
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-154650945
@marmbrus Thanks!
I will try to change equals to semanticEquals in the pull request
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9216. Then, you can decide if this
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-154609690
@marmbrus I already hit this issue when resolving
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-8658. That means, when comparing
two AttributeReferences, we should not
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-154640515
`Expression` instances have two different kinds of equality:
- `equals` full equality, i.e. capitalization, qualifiers, etc. This is
important for example to know
Github user gatorsmile commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#discussion_r43817697
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1019,7 +1019,16 @@ class Analyzer(
* scoping
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153536438
Merged build triggered.
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153536456
Merged build started.
---
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
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153529973
@cloud-fan @dbtsai , Jenkins did not start the testing. Could you let
Jenkins to test it?
Thank you!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user gatorsmile commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#discussion_r43826123
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1019,7 +1019,16 @@ class Analyzer(
* scoping
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153536898
**[Test build #44981 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44981/consoleFull)**
for PR 9385 at commit
Github user dbtsai commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153536164
I think there is some issue in Jenkins.
---
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
Github user dbtsai commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153536227
Jenkins, add to whitelist
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153554640
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153554643
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153554468
**[Test build #44981 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44981/consoleFull)**
for PR 9385 at commit
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-153620226
@dbtsai Thank you!
Please let me know if you need any extra code change.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user holdenk commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#discussion_r43608456
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1019,7 +1019,16 @@ class Analyzer(
* scoping
Github user holdenk commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#discussion_r43608157
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1019,7 +1019,16 @@ class Analyzer(
* scoping
Github user cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-152699107
Logically when we remove `Subquery`, we should remove related `qualifiers`,
however, can you construct a case that hit problems because of not removing
`qualifiers`?
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-152708351
So far, I just observed this strange ghosting values when I read the
optimized logical tree, but my query did not trigger any issue.
Based on my
Github user gatorsmile commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#discussion_r43559826
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1019,7 +1019,16 @@ class Analyzer(
* scoping
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-152664745
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 dbtsai commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385#issuecomment-152669562
Jenkins, okay to test.
---
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 gatorsmile opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9385
[SPARK-11433] [SQL] Cleanup the subquery name after eliminating subquery
This fix is to remove the subquery name in qualifiers after eliminating
subquery.
You can merge this pull request into
34 matches
Mail list logo
