Skip to content

Re-generate golden files #8

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

Conversation

karenfeng
Copy link

Re-generates golden files to fix tests.

Signed-off-by: Karen Feng <karen.feng@databricks.com>
@github-actions github-actions bot added the SQL label Nov 22, 2021
@karenfeng
Copy link
Author

FYI @gengliangwang @entong, this should fix the test failures in apache#34681.

@gengliangwang
Copy link
Owner

Thank you @karenfeng

@gengliangwang gengliangwang merged commit b7d383e into gengliangwang:functionImplicitCast Nov 23, 2021
gengliangwang pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 14, 2022
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?

This PR aims to disable `to_timestamp('366', 'DD')` to recover `ansi` test suite in Java11+.

### Why are the changes needed?

Currently, Daily Java 11 and 17 GitHub Action jobs are broken.
- https://github.com/apache/spark/runs/5511239176?check_suite_focus=true
- https://github.com/apache/spark/runs/5513540604?check_suite_focus=true

**Java 8**
```
$ bin/spark-shell --conf spark.sql.ansi.enabled=true
Setting default log level to "WARN".
To adjust logging level use sc.setLogLevel(newLevel). For SparkR, use setLogLevel(newLevel).
22/03/12 00:59:31 WARN NativeCodeLoader: Unable to load native-hadoop library for your platform... using builtin-java classes where applicable
Spark context Web UI available at http://172.16.0.31:4040
Spark context available as 'sc' (master = local[*], app id = local-1647075572229).
Spark session available as 'spark'.
Welcome to
      ____              __
     / __/__  ___ _____/ /__
    _\ \/ _ \/ _ `/ __/  '_/
   /___/ .__/\_,_/_/ /_/\_\   version 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT
      /_/

Using Scala version 2.12.15 (OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM, Java 1.8.0_322)
Type in expressions to have them evaluated.
Type :help for more information.

scala> sql("select to_timestamp('366', 'DD')").show
java.time.format.DateTimeParseException: Text '366' could not be parsed, unparsed text found at index 2. If necessary set spark.sql.ansi.enabled to false to bypass this error.
```

**Java 11+**
```
$ bin/spark-shell --conf spark.sql.ansi.enabled=true
Setting default log level to "WARN".
To adjust logging level use sc.setLogLevel(newLevel). For SparkR, use setLogLevel(newLevel).
22/03/12 01:00:07 WARN NativeCodeLoader: Unable to load native-hadoop library for your platform... using builtin-java classes where applicable
Spark context Web UI available at http://172.16.0.31:4040
Spark context available as 'sc' (master = local[*], app id = local-1647075607932).
Spark session available as 'spark'.
Welcome to
      ____              __
     / __/__  ___ _____/ /__
    _\ \/ _ \/ _ `/ __/  '_/
   /___/ .__/\_,_/_/ /_/\_\   version 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT
      /_/

Using Scala version 2.12.15 (OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM, Java 11.0.12)
Type in expressions to have them evaluated.
Type :help for more information.

scala> sql("select to_timestamp('366', 'DD')").show
java.time.DateTimeException: Invalid date 'DayOfYear 366' as '1970' is not a leap year. If necessary set spark.sql.ansi.enabled to false to bypass this error.
```

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

No.

### How was this patch tested?

Test with Java 11+.

**BEFORE**
```
$ java -version
openjdk version "17.0.2" 2022-01-18 LTS
OpenJDK Runtime Environment Zulu17.32+13-CA (build 17.0.2+8-LTS)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM Zulu17.32+13-CA (build 17.0.2+8-LTS, mixed mode, sharing)

$ build/sbt "sql/testOnly org.apache.spark.sql.SQLQueryTestSuite -- -z ansi/datetime-parsing-invalid.sql"
...
[info] SQLQueryTestSuite:
01:23:00.219 WARN org.apache.hadoop.util.NativeCodeLoader: Unable to load native-hadoop library for your platform... using builtin-java classes where applicable
01:23:05.209 ERROR org.apache.spark.sql.SQLQueryTestSuite: Error using configs:
[info] - ansi/datetime-parsing-invalid.sql *** FAILED *** (267 milliseconds)
[info]   ansi/datetime-parsing-invalid.sql
[info]   Expected "java.time.[format.DateTimeParseException
[info]   Text '366' could not be parsed, unparsed text found at index 2]. If necessary set s...", but got "java.time.[DateTimeException
[info]   Invalid date 'DayOfYear 366' as '1970' is not a leap year]. If necessary set s..." Result did not match for query #8
[info]   select to_timestamp('366', 'DD') (SQLQueryTestSuite.scala:476)
...
[info] Run completed in 7 seconds, 389 milliseconds.
[info] Total number of tests run: 1
[info] Suites: completed 1, aborted 0
[info] Tests: succeeded 0, failed 1, canceled 0, ignored 0, pending 0
[info] *** 1 TEST FAILED ***
[error] Failed tests:
[error] 	org.apache.spark.sql.SQLQueryTestSuite
[error] (sql / Test / testOnly) sbt.TestsFailedException: Tests unsuccessful
[error] Total time: 21 s, completed Mar 12, 2022, 1:23:05 AM
```

**AFTER**
```
$ build/sbt "sql/testOnly org.apache.spark.sql.SQLQueryTestSuite -- -z ansi/datetime-parsing-invalid.sql"
...
[info] SQLQueryTestSuite:
[info] - ansi/datetime-parsing-invalid.sql (390 milliseconds)
...
[info] Run completed in 7 seconds, 673 milliseconds.
[info] Total number of tests run: 1
[info] Suites: completed 1, aborted 0
[info] Tests: succeeded 1, failed 0, canceled 0, ignored 0, pending 0
[info] All tests passed.
[success] Total time: 20 s, completed Mar 12, 2022, 1:24:52 AM
```

Closes apache#35825 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-38534.

Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
gengliangwang pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2024
…n properly

### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Make `ResolveRelations` handle plan id properly

### Why are the changes needed?
bug fix for Spark Connect, it won't affect classic Spark SQL

before this PR:
```
from pyspark.sql import functions as sf

spark.range(10).withColumn("value_1", sf.lit(1)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_1")
spark.range(10).withColumnRenamed("id", "index").withColumn("value_2", sf.lit(2)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_2")

df1 = spark.read.table("test_table_1")
df2 = spark.read.table("test_table_2")
df3 = spark.read.table("test_table_1")

join1 = df1.join(df2, on=df1.id==df2.index).select(df2.index, df2.value_2)
join2 = df3.join(join1, how="left", on=join1.index==df3.id)

join2.schema
```

fails with
```
AnalysisException: [CANNOT_RESOLVE_DATAFRAME_COLUMN] Cannot resolve dataframe column "id". It's probably because of illegal references like `df1.select(df2.col("a"))`. SQLSTATE: 42704
```

That is due to existing plan caching in `ResolveRelations` doesn't work with Spark Connect

```
=== Applying Rule org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveRelations ===
 '[#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id)                     '[#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id)
!:- '[#9]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false         :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
!+- '[#11]Project ['index, 'value_2]                          :  +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
!   +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index)                   +- '[#11]Project ['index, 'value_2]
!      :- '[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false      +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index)
!      +- '[#8]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_2], [], false         :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
!                                                                   :  +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
!                                                                   +- '[#8]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_2
!                                                                      +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_2`, [], false

Can not resolve 'id with plan 7
```

`[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false` was wrongly resolved to the cached one
```
:- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
   +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
```

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
yes, bug fix

### How was this patch tested?
added ut

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

Closes apache#45214 from zhengruifeng/connect_fix_read_join.

Authored-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com>
gengliangwang pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 1, 2024
…plan properly

### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Make `ResolveRelations` handle plan id properly

cherry-pick bugfix apache#45214 to 3.5

### Why are the changes needed?
bug fix for Spark Connect, it won't affect classic Spark SQL

before this PR:
```
from pyspark.sql import functions as sf

spark.range(10).withColumn("value_1", sf.lit(1)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_1")
spark.range(10).withColumnRenamed("id", "index").withColumn("value_2", sf.lit(2)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_2")

df1 = spark.read.table("test_table_1")
df2 = spark.read.table("test_table_2")
df3 = spark.read.table("test_table_1")

join1 = df1.join(df2, on=df1.id==df2.index).select(df2.index, df2.value_2)
join2 = df3.join(join1, how="left", on=join1.index==df3.id)

join2.schema
```

fails with
```
AnalysisException: [CANNOT_RESOLVE_DATAFRAME_COLUMN] Cannot resolve dataframe column "id". It's probably because of illegal references like `df1.select(df2.col("a"))`. SQLSTATE: 42704
```

That is due to existing plan caching in `ResolveRelations` doesn't work with Spark Connect

```
=== Applying Rule org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveRelations ===
 '[#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id)                     '[#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id)
!:- '[#9]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false         :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
!+- '[#11]Project ['index, 'value_2]                          :  +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
!   +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index)                   +- '[#11]Project ['index, 'value_2]
!      :- '[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false      +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index)
!      +- '[#8]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_2], [], false         :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
!                                                                   :  +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
!                                                                   +- '[#8]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_2
!                                                                      +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_2`, [], false

Can not resolve 'id with plan 7
```

`[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false` was wrongly resolved to the cached one
```
:- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
   +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
```

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
yes, bug fix

### How was this patch tested?
added ut

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

Closes apache#46291 from zhengruifeng/connect_fix_read_join_35.

Authored-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
gengliangwang pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2025
This is a trivial change to replace the loop index from `int` to `long`. Surprisingly, microbenchmark shows more than double performance uplift.

Analysis
--------
The hot loop of `arrayEquals` method is simplifed as below. Loop index `i` is defined as `int`, it's compared with `length`, which is a `long`, to determine if the loop should end.
```
public static boolean arrayEquals(
    Object leftBase, long leftOffset, Object rightBase, long rightOffset, final long length) {
  ......
  int i = 0;
  while (i <= length - 8) {
    if (Platform.getLong(leftBase, leftOffset + i) !=
        Platform.getLong(rightBase, rightOffset + i)) {
          return false;
    }
    i += 8;
  }
  ......
}
```

Strictly speaking, there's a code bug here. If `length` is greater than 2^31 + 8, this loop will never end because `i` as a 32 bit integer is at most 2^31 - 1. But compiler must consider this behaviour as intentional and generate code strictly match the logic. It prevents compiler from generating optimal code.

Defining loop index `i` as `long` corrects this issue. Besides more accurate code logic, JIT is able to optimize this code much more aggressively. From microbenchmark, this trivial change improves performance significantly on both Arm and x86 platforms.

Benchmark
---------
Source code:
https://gist.github.com/cyb70289/258e261f388e22f47e4d961431786d1a

Result on Arm Neoverse N2:
```
Benchmark                             Mode  Cnt    Score   Error  Units
ArrayEqualsBenchmark.arrayEqualsInt   avgt   10  674.313 ± 0.213  ns/op
ArrayEqualsBenchmark.arrayEqualsLong  avgt   10  313.563 ± 2.338  ns/op
```

Result on Intel Cascake Lake:
```
Benchmark                             Mode  Cnt     Score   Error  Units
ArrayEqualsBenchmark.arrayEqualsInt   avgt   10  1130.695 ± 0.168  ns/op
ArrayEqualsBenchmark.arrayEqualsLong  avgt   10   461.979 ± 0.097  ns/op
```

Deep dive
---------
Dive deep to the machine code level, we can see why the big gap. Listed below are arm64 assembly generated by Openjdk-17 C2 compiler.

For `int i`, the machine code is similar to source code, no deep optimization. Safepoint polling is expensive in this short loop.
```
// jit c2 machine code snippet
  0x0000ffff81ba8904:   mov        w15, wzr              // int i = 0
  0x0000ffff81ba8908:   nop
  0x0000ffff81ba890c:   nop
loop:
  0x0000ffff81ba8910:   ldr        x10, [x13, w15, sxtw] // Platform.getLong(leftBase, leftOffset + i)
  0x0000ffff81ba8914:   ldr        x14, [x12, w15, sxtw] // Platform.getLong(rightBase, rightOffset + i)
  0x0000ffff81ba8918:   cmp        x10, x14
  0x0000ffff81ba891c:   b.ne       0x0000ffff81ba899c    // return false if not equal
  0x0000ffff81ba8920:   ldr        x14, [x28, apache#848]      // x14 -> safepoint
  0x0000ffff81ba8924:   add        w15, w15, #0x8        // i += 8
  0x0000ffff81ba8928:   ldr        wzr, [x14]            // safepoint polling
  0x0000ffff81ba892c:   sxtw       x10, w15              // extend i to long
  0x0000ffff81ba8930:   cmp        x10, x11
  0x0000ffff81ba8934:   b.le       0x0000ffff81ba8910    // if (i <= length - 8) goto loop
```

For `long i`, JIT is able to do much more aggressive optimization. E.g, below code snippet unrolls the loop by four.
```
// jit c2 machine code snippet
unrolled_loop:
  0x0000ffff91de6fe0:   sxtw       x10, w7
  0x0000ffff91de6fe4:   add        x23, x22, x10
  0x0000ffff91de6fe8:   add        x24, x21, x10
  0x0000ffff91de6fec:   ldr        x13, [x23]          // unroll-1
  0x0000ffff91de6ff0:   ldr        x14, [x24]
  0x0000ffff91de6ff4:   cmp        x13, x14
  0x0000ffff91de6ff8:   b.ne       0x0000ffff91de70a8
  0x0000ffff91de6ffc:   ldr        x13, [x23, #8]      // unroll-2
  0x0000ffff91de7000:   ldr        x14, [x24, #8]
  0x0000ffff91de7004:   cmp        x13, x14
  0x0000ffff91de7008:   b.ne       0x0000ffff91de70b4
  0x0000ffff91de700c:   ldr        x13, [x23, apache#16]     // unroll-3
  0x0000ffff91de7010:   ldr        x14, [x24, apache#16]
  0x0000ffff91de7014:   cmp        x13, x14
  0x0000ffff91de7018:   b.ne       0x0000ffff91de70a4
  0x0000ffff91de701c:   ldr        x13, [x23, apache#24]     // unroll-4
  0x0000ffff91de7020:   ldr        x14, [x24, apache#24]
  0x0000ffff91de7024:   cmp        x13, x14
  0x0000ffff91de7028:   b.ne       0x0000ffff91de70b0
  0x0000ffff91de702c:   add        w7, w7, #0x20
  0x0000ffff91de7030:   cmp        w7, w11
  0x0000ffff91de7034:   b.lt       0x0000ffff91de6fe0
```

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

A trivial change to replace loop index `i` of method `arrayEquals` from `int` to `long`.

### Why are the changes needed?

To improve performance and fix a possible bug.

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

No.

### How was this patch tested?

Existing unit tests.

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

No.

Closes apache#49568 from cyb70289/arrayEquals.

Authored-by: Yibo Cai <cyb70289@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants