[SPARK-29237][SQL][FOLLOWUP] Ignore SET commands in expression examples while checking the _FUNC_ pattern
#25958
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
Member
Author
|
@dongjoon-hyun @HeartSaVioR Please, take a look at this PR. This should prevent failures like this #25957 (comment) |
|
Test build #111532 has finished for PR 25958 at commit
|
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Sep 28, 2019
Member
|
@MaxGekk can you resolve conflicts? |
|
Test build #111537 has finished for PR 25958 at commit
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
The
SETcommands do not contain the_FUNC_pattern a priori. In the PR, I propose filter out such commands in theusing _FUNC_ instead of function names in examplestest.Why are the changes needed?
After the merge of #25942, examples will require particular settings. Currently, the whole expression example has to be ignored which is so much. It makes sense to ignore only
SETcommands in expression examples.Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
By running the
using _FUNC_ instead of function names in examplestest.