[SPARK-40965][SQL] Rename the error class _LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208 to FIELD_NOT_FOUND
#38435
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
MaxGekk
changed the title
FIELD_NOT_FOUND_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208 to FIELD_NOT_FOUND
MaxGekk
changed the title
_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208 to FIELD_NOT_FOUND_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208 to FIELD_NOT_FOUND
MaxGekk
changed the title
_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208 to FIELD_NOT_FOUND_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208 to FIELD_NOT_FOUND
Member
Author
|
@cloud-fan @itholic @srielau @panbingkun @LuciferYang Could you review this PR, please. |
Member
Author
|
Merging to master. Thank you, @itholic @LuciferYang @srielau for review. |
cloud-fan
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
| ], | ||
| "sqlState" : "22023" | ||
| }, | ||
| "FIELD_NOT_FOUND" : { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wondering if we should unify column and field (which is nested column) in the error message. cc @srielau
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, that was kind of my earlier question. How is this different from UNRESOLVED_COLUMN? (Which does include fields in the message). But it seems we KNOW that we are talking about a field here (DDL?)
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But it seems we KNOW that we are talking about a field here (DDL?)
Even more specifically, we look for a field in a struct, and the struct doesn't have such field.
SandishKumarHN
pushed a commit
to SandishKumarHN/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2022
…to `FIELD_NOT_FOUND` ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? In the PR, I propose to assign the proper name `FIELD_NOT_FOUND ` to the legacy error class `_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208 `, and modify test suite to use `checkError()` which checks the error class name, context and etc. ### Why are the changes needed? Proper name improves user experience w/ Spark SQL. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? Yes, the PR changes an user-facing error message. ### How was this patch tested? By running the modified test suites: ``` $ build/sbt "test:testOnly *AnalysisErrorSuite" $ build/sbt "test:testOnly *ResolveSubquerySuite" $ build/sbt "test:testOnly *EncoderResolutionSuite" $ build/sbt "test:testOnly *SQLQuerySuite" ``` Closes apache#38435 from MaxGekk/field-not-found-error-class. Authored-by: Max Gekk <max.gekk@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Max Gekk <max.gekk@gmail.com>
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?
In the PR, I propose to assign the proper name
FIELD_NOT_FOUNDto the legacy error class_LEGACY_ERROR_TEMP_1208, and modify test suite to usecheckError()which checks the error class name, context and etc.Why are the changes needed?
Proper name improves user experience w/ Spark SQL.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Yes, the PR changes an user-facing error message.
How was this patch tested?
By running the modified test suites: