[MINOR][SQL] Modify the example of rand and randn. #32844
Closed
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
|
Kubernetes integration test starting |
|
Kubernetes integration test status failure |
|
Test build #139578 has finished for PR 32844 at commit
|
HyukjinKwon
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2021
Member
|
Merged to master, brnach-3.1 and branch-3.0. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 PR fixes the examples of
randandrandn.Why are the changes needed?
SPARK-23643 (#20793) fixes an issue which is related to the seed and it causes the result of
randandrandn.Now the results of
SELECT rand(0)andSELECT randn((null)are0.7604953758285915and1.6034991609278433respectively, and they should be deterministic because the number of partitions are always 1 (the leaf node isOneRowRelation).Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Built the doc and confirmed it.
