davidm-db opened a new pull request, #51034:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/51034
<!--
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.
-->
This pull request proposes an improvement in how conditions are matched with
exception handlers. Previously, condition would match with an exception handler
only if the match was full/complete - i.e. condition `<MAIN>.<SUBCLASS>` would
match only to the handler defined for `<MAIN>.<SUBCLASS>`. With this
improvement, `<MAIN>.<SUBCLASS>` condition would match to the handlers defined
for `<MAIN>` condition as well, with correct precedence.
This pull requests also proposes a number of fixes for different missing
things:
- `CompoundBodyExec.reset()` is not resetting the `scopeStatus` field.
- Exception handler body is never reset (this includes internal iterator
reset). This causes issues if the handler is defined in a loop and gets matched
multiple times.
- When searching for a place to inject `LEAVE` statement, after the `EXIT`
handler has been executed, the logic considered only `CompoundBodyExec` nodes,
whereas it should have included all non-leaf statements.
- Exception handling for exceptions that happen in conditions (for each
statement type - if/else, while, case, etc) is not working properly because the
injected `LEAVE` statement is not recognized properly.
- Exception handling for exceptions that happen in the last statement of the
body of if/else and searched case statement is not working properly because the
injected `LEAVE` statement is not recognized properly.
- `hasNext()` in `ForStatementExec` is executing the query. This causes the
issues in cases when `FOR` is the first statement in the compound and the query
fails. It means that exception would happen during the `hasNext()` checks
instead of the actual iteration. In such case, the parent compound (of the
`FOR` statement) is not entered (because that happens during the iteration) and
call stack is not properly setup for exception handling.
Changes corresponding to this problems, in the same order:
- Reset the `scopeStatus` field in `CompoundBodyExec.reset()`.
- Call `reset()` on handler before starting its execution in
`SqlScriptingExecution.handleException()`.
- Move `curr` pointer to `NonLeafStatementExec` and use that in
`SqlScriptingExecution. getNextStatement()` in case when `EXIT` handler is
finished and removed from the stack.
- Add special case handling for `LeaveStatementExec` in `*.Condition` cases
in all of the relevant statement types. When exception happens during the
condition execution, the `LeaveStatementExec` is injected into `curr` field,
but the state hasn't changed. This means that when the `LEAVE` statement is to
be executed, the state would correspond to the condition. **I don't know how to
do this better, so any suggestions are more than welcome!**
- Add special case handling for `LeaveStatementExec` in `*Body` cases of
if/else and searched case statement - equivalent to the previous bullet.
- Reorder conditions in `ForStatementExec.hasNext()`.
### 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.
2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
-->
These changes are fixing wrong logic and improving some of the already
existing exception handling mechanisms.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
<!--
Note that it means *any* user-facing change including all aspects such as
new features, bug fixes, or other behavior changes. Documentation-only updates
are not considered user-facing changes.
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'.
-->
No.
### 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 unit tests are added for to test/guard all of the introduced
improvements.
### 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: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
