Skip to content

[SPARK-27938][SQL] Remove feature flag LEGACY_PASS_PARTITION_BY_AS_OPTIONS #24784

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Closed
liwensun wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

[SPARK-27938][SQL] Remove feature flag LEGACY_PASS_PARTITION_BY_AS_OPTIONS #24784

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ea49eed
change the conf default
liwensun Jun 3, 2019
2e18093
remove legacy config
liwensun Jun 6, 2019
bbd8d14
fix test
liwensun Jun 6, 2019
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/internal/SQLConf.scala
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1718,7 +1718,7 @@ object SQLConf {
"Data source V1 now silently drops partitionBy columns for non-file-format sources; " +
"turning the flag on provides a way for these sources to see these partitionBy columns.")
.booleanConf
.createWithDefault(false)
.createWithDefault(true)
Comment thread
dongjoon-hyun marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated

@HyukjinKwon HyukjinKwon Jun 4, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, why do we need this configuration if it's not invasive?

@gengliangwang gengliangwang Jun 4, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it was to avoid possible regression for the release 2.4.3, which was reasonable at that time.

@HyukjinKwon HyukjinKwon Jun 4, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's not intrusive then should be no regression strictly though. Yea but I got that it was an extra caution. Can we remove it now in master?

@srowen srowen Jun 4, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree, we should be removing these in 3.0 rather than defaulting back to legacy behavior.

@liwensun liwensun Jun 5, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds good to me. I will go ahead and remove this feature flag altogether if no objections.

@dongjoon-hyun dongjoon-hyun Jun 5, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1

@dongjoon-hyun dongjoon-hyun Jun 5, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

cc @gatorsmile

@gatorsmile gatorsmile Jun 6, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1


val NAME_NON_STRUCT_GROUPING_KEY_AS_VALUE =
buildConf("spark.sql.legacy.dataset.nameNonStructGroupingKeyAsValue")
Expand Down