cloud-fan opened a new pull request, #45350:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/45350
<!--
Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines:
https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html
2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR:
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html
3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g.,
'[WIP][SPARK-XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
4. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
5. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes.
6. If possible, provide a concise example to reproduce the issue for a
faster review.
7. If you want to add a new configuration, please read the guideline first
for naming configurations in
'core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/internal/config/ConfigEntry.scala'.
8. If you want to add or modify an error type or message, please read the
guideline first in
'common/utils/src/main/resources/error/README.md'.
-->
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
<!--
Please clarify what changes you are proposing. The purpose of this section
is to outline the changes and how this PR fixes the issue.
If possible, please consider writing useful notes for better and faster
reviews in your PR. See the examples below.
1. If you refactor some codes with changing classes, showing the class
hierarchy will help reviewers.
2. If you fix some SQL features, you can provide some references of other
DBMSes.
3. If there is design documentation, please add the link.
4. If there is a discussion in the mailing list, please add the link.
-->
The rule `ExtractGenerator` does not define any trigger condition when
rewriting generator functions in `Project`, which makes the behavior quite
unstable and heavily depends on the execution order of analyzer rules.
Two bugs I've found so far:
1. By design, we want to forbid users from using more than one generator
function in SELECT. However, we can't really enforce it if two generator
functions are not resolved at the same time: the rule thinks there is only one
generate function (the other is still unresolved), then rewrite it. The other
one gets resolved later and gets rewritten later.
2. When a generator function is put after `SELECT *`, it's possible that `*`
is not expanded yet when we enter `ExtractGenerator`. The rule rewrites the
generator function: insert a `Generate` operator below, and add a new column to
the projectList for the generator function output. Then we expand `*` to the
child plan output which is `Generate`, we end up with two identical columns for
the generate function output.
This PR fixes it by adding a trigger condition when rewriting generator
functions in `Project`: the projectList should be resolved or a generator
function. This is the same trigger condition we used for `Aggregate`. To avoid
breaking changes, this PR also allows multiple generator functions in
`Project`, which works totally fine.
### Why are the changes needed?
<!--
Please clarify why the changes are needed. For instance,
1. If you propose a new API, clarify the use case for a new API.
4. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
-->
bug fix
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
<!--
Note that it means *any* user-facing change including all aspects such as
the documentation fix.
If yes, please clarify the previous behavior and the change this PR proposes
- provide the console output, description and/or an example to show the
behavior difference if possible.
If possible, please also clarify if this is a user-facing change compared to
the released Spark versions or within the unreleased branches such as master.
If no, write 'No'.
-->
Yes, now multiple generator functions are allowed in `Project`. And there
won't be duplicated columns for generator function output.
### How was this patch tested?
<!--
If tests were added, say they were added here. Please make sure to add some
test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive
cases if possible.
If it was tested in a way different from regular unit tests, please clarify
how you tested step by step, ideally copy and paste-able, so that other
reviewers can test and check, and descendants can verify in the future.
If tests were not added, please describe why they were not added and/or why
it was difficult to add.
If benchmark tests were added, please run the benchmarks in GitHub Actions
for the consistent environment, and the instructions could accord to:
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html#github-workflow-benchmarks.
-->
new test
### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
<!--
If generative AI tooling has been used in the process of authoring this
patch, please include the
phrase: 'Generated-by: ' followed by the name of the tool and its version.
If no, write 'No'.
Please refer to the [ASF Generative Tooling
Guidance](https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html) for details.
-->
No
--
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
