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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Spark 3.5: Support default values in vectorized reads #11815
Spark 3.5: Support default values in vectorized reads #11815
Changes from 1 commit
a54dd2e
f21fe7e
9c48b0b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Removing this test for
TimestampNTZ
by adding the type toSUPPORTED_PRIMITIVES
(so that it is handled like any other primitive) is what broke the ORC tests. It looks like the problem is that Spark 3.5'sColumnarRow
doesn't supportTimestampNTZType
. As a temporary work-around, I've added validation code that checks the value by accessing it as aTimestampType
instead.This isn't a change to read behavior, just how we access the data to validate it. I expect to be able to remove this workaround in the next Spark version.
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.
yeah I noticed that too and was planning on fixing that in Spark. I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-50624