[SPARK-18854][SQL] numberedTreeString and apply(i) inconsistent for subqueries #16277
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
rxin
commented
Dec 14, 2016
|
|
||
| if (depth > 0) { | ||
| lastChildren.init.foreach { isLast => | ||
| val prefixFragment = if (isLast) " " else ": " |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
all these variable names are pretty confusing, so I got rid of all of them.
Contributor
Author
rxin
commented
Dec 14, 2016
| children.init.foreach( | ||
| _.generateTreeString(depth + 1, lastChildren :+ false, builder, verbose, prefix)) | ||
| children.last.generateTreeString(depth + 1, lastChildren :+ true, builder, verbose, prefix) | ||
| children.init.foreach(_.generateTreeString( |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i re-arranged this so it looks exactly the same as the way we traverse innerChildren (just 4 lines up) to make it more obvious.
|
Test build #70125 has started for PR 16277 at commit |
Contributor
|
LGTM |
|
Test build #3496 has finished for PR 16277 at commit
|
|
Test build #3497 has finished for PR 16277 at commit
|
asfgit
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2016
…ubqueries ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? This is a bug introduced by subquery handling. numberedTreeString (which uses generateTreeString under the hood) numbers trees including innerChildren (used to print subqueries), but apply (which uses getNodeNumbered) ignores innerChildren. As a result, apply(i) would return the wrong plan node if there are subqueries. This patch fixes the bug. ## How was this patch tested? Added a test case in SubquerySuite.scala to test both the depth-first traversal of numbering as well as making sure the two methods are consistent. Author: Reynold Xin <rxin@databricks.com> Closes #16277 from rxin/SPARK-18854. (cherry picked from commit ffdd1fc) Signed-off-by: Reynold Xin <rxin@databricks.com>
asfgit
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2016
…ubqueries This is a bug introduced by subquery handling. numberedTreeString (which uses generateTreeString under the hood) numbers trees including innerChildren (used to print subqueries), but apply (which uses getNodeNumbered) ignores innerChildren. As a result, apply(i) would return the wrong plan node if there are subqueries. This patch fixes the bug. Added a test case in SubquerySuite.scala to test both the depth-first traversal of numbering as well as making sure the two methods are consistent. Author: Reynold Xin <rxin@databricks.com> Closes #16277 from rxin/SPARK-18854. (cherry picked from commit ffdd1fc) Signed-off-by: Reynold Xin <rxin@databricks.com>
robert3005
pushed a commit
to palantir/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2016
…ubqueries ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? This is a bug introduced by subquery handling. numberedTreeString (which uses generateTreeString under the hood) numbers trees including innerChildren (used to print subqueries), but apply (which uses getNodeNumbered) ignores innerChildren. As a result, apply(i) would return the wrong plan node if there are subqueries. This patch fixes the bug. ## How was this patch tested? Added a test case in SubquerySuite.scala to test both the depth-first traversal of numbering as well as making sure the two methods are consistent. Author: Reynold Xin <rxin@databricks.com> Closes apache#16277 from rxin/SPARK-18854.
uzadude
pushed a commit
to uzadude/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 27, 2017
…ubqueries ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? This is a bug introduced by subquery handling. numberedTreeString (which uses generateTreeString under the hood) numbers trees including innerChildren (used to print subqueries), but apply (which uses getNodeNumbered) ignores innerChildren. As a result, apply(i) would return the wrong plan node if there are subqueries. This patch fixes the bug. ## How was this patch tested? Added a test case in SubquerySuite.scala to test both the depth-first traversal of numbering as well as making sure the two methods are consistent. Author: Reynold Xin <rxin@databricks.com> Closes apache#16277 from rxin/SPARK-18854.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This is a bug introduced by subquery handling. numberedTreeString (which uses generateTreeString under the hood) numbers trees including innerChildren (used to print subqueries), but apply (which uses getNodeNumbered) ignores innerChildren. As a result, apply(i) would return the wrong plan node if there are subqueries.
This patch fixes the bug.
How was this patch tested?
Added a test case in SubquerySuite.scala to test both the depth-first traversal of numbering as well as making sure the two methods are consistent.