UPDATE: Sorry I just missed the PR ( https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28026). I still think it'd be nice to avoid recycling the JIRA issue which was resolved before. Shall we have a new JIRA issue with linking to SPARK-30098, and set proper priority?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 7:59 AM Jungtaek Lim <kabhwan.opensou...@gmail.com> wrote: > Would it be better to prioritize this to make sure the change is included > in Spark 3.0? (Maybe filing an issue and set as a blocker) > > Looks like there's consensus that SPARK-30098 brought ambiguous issue > which should be fixed (though the consideration of severity seems to be > different), and once we notice the issue it would be really odd if we > publish it as it is, and try to fix it later (the fix may not be even > included in 3.0.x as it might bring behavioral change). > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 3:37 PM Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Ryan, >> >> It's great to hear that you are cleaning up this long-standing mess. >> Please let me know if you hit any problems that I can help with. >> >> Thanks, >> Wenchen >> >> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 3:16 AM Nicholas Chammas < >> nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 3:46 AM Wenchen Fan <cloud0...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> 2. PARTITIONED BY colTypeList: I think we can support it in the >>>> unified syntax. Just make sure it doesn't appear together with PARTITIONED >>>> BY transformList. >>>> >>> >>> Another side note: Perhaps as part of (or after) unifying the CREATE >>> TABLE syntax, we can also update Catalog.createTable() to support >>> creating partitioned tables >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-31001>. >>> >>
