HeartSaVioR commented on code in PR #40561:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/40561#discussion_r1151462460
##########
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala:
##########
@@ -679,6 +679,8 @@ object RemoveNoopUnion extends Rule[LogicalPlan] {
d.withNewChildren(Seq(simplifyUnion(u)))
case d @ Deduplicate(_, u: Union) =>
d.withNewChildren(Seq(simplifyUnion(u)))
+ case d @ DeduplicateWithinWatermark(_, u: Union) =>
Review Comment:
No what I meant is, if we assume the perfect watermark on streaming side,
streaming query is designed to produce the same output with batch one.
dropDuplicates() is no exception.
Arguably, dropDuplicatesWithinWatermark is an exception because they are not
only required to reason about "lateness" of the data, but also required to
reason about max time duration on duplicated events. (Technically saying, both
are different.) Would it be safe to just change read to readStream / write to
writeStream and vice versa? Mostly yes for existing API, but maybe not for this
API.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
