-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.9k
[SPARK-8610] [SQL] Separate Row and InternalRow (part 2) #7003
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Conflicts: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/generators.scala
|
Test build #35740 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
Test build #35737 timed out for PR 7003 at commit |
|
Test build #960 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should we add final to make sure all InternalRow implementations can not define these functions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
will do
|
Test build #35758 timed out for PR 7003 at commit |
Conflicts: sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/sources/TableScanSuite.scala
|
Test build #35901 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
Test build #35903 timed out for PR 7003 at commit |
|
Test build #35908 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
Test build #35916 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
Jenkins, retest this please. |
|
(That test failure is my fault; already hotfixed) |
|
Test build #969 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
Test build #35921 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
Test build #970 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
Test build #35934 has finished for PR 7003 at commit
|
|
LGTM. For data source API, I understand we need an efficient way to cast between |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need SparkSqlSerializer to serialize GenericRow?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I haven't looked the details, just follow the old code.
|
In order to reduce the conflicts, I'm merging this into master. |
Currently, we use GenericRow both for Row and InternalRow, which is confusing because it could contain Scala type also Catalyst types.
This PR changes to use GenericInternalRow for InternalRow (contains catalyst types), GenericRow for Row (contains Scala types).
Also fixes some incorrect use of InternalRow or Row.