SEPURI-SAI-KRISHNA commented on code in PR #58703: URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/58703#discussion_r4074898366
########## docs/sql-migration-guide.md: ########## @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ license: | - Since Spark 4.4, the CSV `extension` option must be non-empty and contain only letters. In Spark 4.3 and earlier, due to a bug in the extension validation check, empty strings and three-character suffixes containing non-letters (for example `ab1`) were accepted. This affects both writes and reads of CSV tables whose persisted `OPTIONS` contain such values; update the option to a non-empty letters-only suffix to restore access. - Since Spark 4.4, when `array_repeat` or `array_insert` is asked to build an array larger than the maximum supported array length, generated code raises the same error as interpreted evaluation. `array_repeat` now fails with `COLLECTION_SIZE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED.PARAMETER` instead of the internal error `_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_2176`, and `array_insert` fails with `COLLECTION_SIZE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED.FUNCTION` instead of `COLLECTION_SIZE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED.PARAMETER`, which named a `count` parameter that `array_insert` does not have. Both functions raise an error under exactly the same conditions as before; only the reported error condition changes. - Since Spark 4.4, `/*+ ... */` inside a bracketed comment is parsed as a nested comment, so its closing `*/` no longer closes the outer comment. For example, `/* note /*+ x */ SELECT 1` previously returned `1`, but now raises `UNCLOSED_BRACKETED_COMMENT`. Close the outer comment explicitly, for example `/* note /*+ x */ */ SELECT 1`. +- Since Spark 4.4, when `concat` is asked to build an array larger than the maximum supported array length, generated code raises the same error as interpreted evaluation, `COLLECTION_SIZE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED.FUNCTION`, instead of the internal error `_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_2176`. `concat` raises an error under exactly the same conditions as before; only the reported error condition changes. Review Comment: Agreed, dropped the migration guide entry. The condition being replaced was `_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_2176`, which was never a documented user-facing condition, so there is nothing for a reader to migrate from. That also settles the conflicts: the migration guide was the only file conflicting, and the branch no longer touches it. -- 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]
