Skip to content

Conversation

@pan3793
Copy link
Member

@pan3793 pan3793 commented Feb 11, 2026

Backport #53910 and #53933 to branch-4.0

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Pandas 3.0 released, pin 'pandas==2.3.3' to recover the CI.

Why are the changes needed?

Recover CI.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Wait for GHA result.

Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

No.

zhengruifeng and others added 2 commits February 11, 2026 12:56
Restore Restore SQL tests by pin 'pandas<3'

pandas 3 is just released, and fail sql tests

https://github.com/apache/spark/actions/runs/21232213791/job/61092886134

currently pandas 3 doesn't affect python tests too much:
1, in `dev/requirements.txt`, the latest `mlflow==3.8.1` requires: `pandas<3`
2, `pandas==2.3.3` is pinned in most places

no

ci

no

Closes apache#53910 from zhengruifeng/restore_sql.

Authored-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
…3' for maven daily test

Similar to apache#53910, this pr pins the pandas version to 2.3.3.

To  restore SQL tests for maven daily test.
- https://github.com/apache/spark/actions/runs/21249870076/job/61148348328

```
- udf/postgreSQL/udf-case.sql - Scalar Pandas UDF *** FAILED ***
  udf/postgreSQL/udf-case.sql - Scalar Pandas UDF
  Python: 3.11 Pandas: 3.0.0 PyArrow: 23.0.0
  Expected Some("struct<Two:string,i:int,f:double,i:int,j:int>"), but got Some("struct<>") Schema did not match for query apache#30
  SELECT '' AS `Two`, *
    FROM CASE_TBL a, CASE2_TBL b
    WHERE udf(COALESCE(f,b.i) = 2): -- !query
  SELECT '' AS `Two`, *
    FROM CASE_TBL a, CASE2_TBL b
    WHERE udf(COALESCE(f,b.i) = 2)
  -- !query schema
  struct<>
  -- !query output
  org.apache.spark.SparkRuntimeException
  {
    "errorClass" : "CAST_INVALID_INPUT",
    "sqlState" : "22018",
    "messageParameters" : {
      "ansiConfig" : "\"spark.sql.ansi.enabled\"",
      "expression" : "'nan'",
      "sourceType" : "\"STRING\"",
      "targetType" : "\"BOOLEAN\""
    },
    "queryContext" : [ {
      "objectType" : "",
      "objectName" : "",
      "startIndex" : 62,
      "stopIndex" : 85,
      "fragment" : "udf(COALESCE(f,b.i) = 2)"
    } ]
  } (SQLQueryTestSuite.scala:681)
```

No

monitor maven daily test after pr merged

No

Closes apache#53933 from LuciferYang/SPARK-55128-FOLLOWUP.

Authored-by: yangjie01 <yangjie01@baidu.com>
Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Member

cc @zhengruifeng @LuciferYang

@pan3793
Copy link
Member Author

pan3793 commented Feb 11, 2026

@HyukjinKwon, bring up my previous suggestion - pyspark should use fixed or range version to decalre the dependency, for release branches and tags.

#52633 (comment)

@pan3793
Copy link
Member Author

pan3793 commented Feb 11, 2026

CI passes except for the irrelevant one - it was tackled by SPARK-54470 (4.1.0)

[info] - SPARK-46957: Migrated shuffle files should be able to cleanup from executor *** FAILED *** (36 seconds, 981 milliseconds)
[info]   0 was not greater than or equal to 8 (BlockManagerDecommissionIntegrationSuite.scala:427)
...

thanks, merging to branch-4.0

pan3793 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 11, 2026
Backport #53910 and #53933 to branch-4.0

### What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Pandas 3.0 released, pin 'pandas==2.3.3' to recover the CI.

### Why are the changes needed?

Recover CI.

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?

No.

### How was this patch tested?

Wait for GHA result.

### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

No.

Closes #54263 from pan3793/SPARK-55128-4.0.

Lead-authored-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
Co-authored-by: yangjie01 <yangjie01@baidu.com>
Signed-off-by: Cheng Pan <chengpan@apache.org>
@pan3793
Copy link
Member Author

pan3793 commented Feb 11, 2026

closed via 964a3ef

@pan3793 pan3793 closed this Feb 11, 2026
@pan3793 pan3793 deleted the SPARK-55128-4.0 branch February 11, 2026 06:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants