fix #3
Merged
fix #3
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
merged |
|
Thanks! |
maropu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 10, 2019
maropu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 29, 2019
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? `org.apache.spark.sql.kafka010.KafkaDelegationTokenSuite` failed lately. After had a look at the logs it just shows the following fact without any details: ``` Caused by: sbt.ForkMain$ForkError: sun.security.krb5.KrbException: Server not found in Kerberos database (7) - Server not found in Kerberos database ``` Since the issue is intermittent and not able to reproduce it we should add more debug information and wait for reproduction with the extended logs. ### Why are the changes needed? Failing test doesn't give enough debug information. ### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? I've started the test manually and checked that such additional debug messages show up: ``` >>> KrbApReq: APOptions are 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 >>> EType: sun.security.krb5.internal.crypto.Aes128CtsHmacSha1EType Looking for keys for: kafka/localhostEXAMPLE.COM Added key: 17version: 0 Added key: 23version: 0 Added key: 16version: 0 Found unsupported keytype (3) for kafka/localhostEXAMPLE.COM >>> EType: sun.security.krb5.internal.crypto.Aes128CtsHmacSha1EType Using builtin default etypes for permitted_enctypes default etypes for permitted_enctypes: 17 16 23. >>> EType: sun.security.krb5.internal.crypto.Aes128CtsHmacSha1EType MemoryCache: add 1571936500/174770/16C565221B70AAB2BEFE31A83D13A2F4/client/localhostEXAMPLE.COM to client/localhostEXAMPLE.COM|kafka/localhostEXAMPLE.COM MemoryCache: Existing AuthList: #3: 1571936493/200803/8CD70D280B0862C5DA1FF901ECAD39FE/client/localhostEXAMPLE.COM #2: 1571936499/985009/BAD33290D079DD4E3579A8686EC326B7/client/localhostEXAMPLE.COM #1: 1571936499/995208/B76B9D78A9BE283AC78340157107FD40/client/localhostEXAMPLE.COM ``` Closes apache#26252 from gaborgsomogyi/SPARK-29580. Authored-by: Gabor Somogyi <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
maropu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2020
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR proposes to make `PythonFunction` holds `Seq[Byte]` instead of `Array[Byte]` to be able to compare if the byte array has the same values for the cache manager.
### Why are the changes needed?
Currently the cache manager doesn't use the cache for `udf` if the `udf` is created again even if the functions is the same.
```py
>>> func = lambda x: x
>>> df = spark.range(1)
>>> df.select(udf(func)("id")).cache()
```
```py
>>> df.select(udf(func)("id")).explain()
== Physical Plan ==
*(2) Project [pythonUDF0#14 AS <lambda>(id)apache#12]
+- BatchEvalPython [<lambda>(id#0L)], [pythonUDF0#14]
+- *(1) Range (0, 1, step=1, splits=12)
```
This is because `PythonFunction` holds `Array[Byte]`, and `equals` method of array equals only when the both array is the same instance.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
Yes, if the user reuse the Python function for the UDF, the cache manager will detect the same function and use the cache for it.
### How was this patch tested?
I added a test case and manually.
```py
>>> df.select(udf(func)("id")).explain()
== Physical Plan ==
InMemoryTableScan [<lambda>(id)apache#12]
+- InMemoryRelation [<lambda>(id)apache#12], StorageLevel(disk, memory, deserialized, 1 replicas)
+- *(2) Project [pythonUDF0#5 AS <lambda>(id)#3]
+- BatchEvalPython [<lambda>(id#0L)], [pythonUDF0#5]
+- *(1) Range (0, 1, step=1, splits=12)
```
Closes apache#28774 from ueshin/issues/SPARK-31945/udf_cache.
Authored-by: Takuya UESHIN <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <[email protected]>
maropu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 16, 2020
… without WindowExpression
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Add WindowFunction check at `CheckAnalysis`.
### Why are the changes needed?
Provide friendly error msg.
**BEFORE**
```scala
scala> sql("select rank() from values(1)").show
java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Cannot generate code for expression: rank()
```
**AFTER**
```scala
scala> sql("select rank() from values(1)").show
org.apache.spark.sql.AnalysisException: Window function rank() requires an OVER clause.;;
Project [rank() AS RANK()#3]
+- LocalRelation [col1#2]
```
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
Yes, user wiill be given a better error msg.
### How was this patch tested?
Pass the newly added UT.
Closes apache#28808 from ulysses-you/SPARK-31975.
Authored-by: ulysses <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Add more case-sensitive test.
This change is