[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-20198?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15953056#comment-15953056 ]
Apache Spark commented on SPARK-20198: -------------------------------------- User 'gatorsmile' has created a pull request for this issue: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17518 > Remove the inconsistency when table/function name definitions in > SparkSession.Catalog APIs > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: SPARK-20198 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-20198 > Project: Spark > Issue Type: Bug > Components: SQL > Affects Versions: 2.0.2, 2.1.1, 2.2.0 > Reporter: Xiao Li > Assignee: Xiao Li > > Observed by @felixcheung , in `SparkSession`.`Catalog` APIs, we have > different conventions/rules for table/function identifiers/names. Most APIs > accept the qualified name (i.e., `databaseName`.`tableName` or > `databaseName`.`functionName`). However, the following five APIs do not > accept it. > - def listColumns(tableName: String): Dataset[Column] > - def getTable(tableName: String): Table > - def getFunction(functionName: String): Function > - def tableExists(tableName: String): Boolean > - def functionExists(functionName: String): Boolean > It is desirable to make them more consistent with the other Catalog APIs, > updates the function/API comments and adds the `@params` to clarify the > inputs we allow. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org