### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR proposes to make `PythonFunction` holds `Seq[Byte]` instead of `Array[Byte]` to be able to compare if the byte array has the same values for the cache manager.
### Why are the changes needed?
Currently the cache manager doesn't use the cache for `udf` if the `udf` is created again even if the functions is the same.
```py
>>> func = lambda x: x
>>> df = spark.range(1)
>>> df.select(udf(func)("id")).cache()
```
```py
>>> df.select(udf(func)("id")).explain()
== Physical Plan ==
*(2) Project [pythonUDF0#14 AS <lambda>(id)#12]
+- BatchEvalPython [<lambda>(id#0L)], [pythonUDF0#14]
+- *(1) Range (0, 1, step=1, splits=12)
```
This is because `PythonFunction` holds `Array[Byte]`, and `equals` method of array equals only when the both array is the same instance.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
Yes, if the user reuse the Python function for the UDF, the cache manager will detect the same function and use the cache for it.
### How was this patch tested?
I added a test case and manually.
```py
>>> df.select(udf(func)("id")).explain()
== Physical Plan ==
InMemoryTableScan [<lambda>(id)#12]
+- InMemoryRelation [<lambda>(id)#12], StorageLevel(disk, memory, deserialized, 1 replicas)
+- *(2) Project [pythonUDF0#5 AS <lambda>(id)#3]
+- BatchEvalPython [<lambda>(id#0L)], [pythonUDF0#5]
+- *(1) Range (0, 1, step=1, splits=12)
```
Closes#28774 from ueshin/issues/SPARK-31945/udf_cache.
Authored-by: Takuya UESHIN <ueshin@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR proposes to redesign pandas UDFs as described in [the proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-kV0FS_LF2zvaRh_GhkV32Uqksm_Sq8SvnBBmRyxm30/edit?usp=sharing).
```python
from pyspark.sql.functions import pandas_udf
import pandas as pd
pandas_udf("long")
def plug_one(s: pd.Series) -> pd.Series:
return s + 1
spark.range(10).select(plug_one("id")).show()
```
```
+------------+
|plug_one(id)|
+------------+
| 1|
| 2|
| 3|
| 4|
| 5|
| 6|
| 7|
| 8|
| 9|
| 10|
+------------+
```
Note that, this PR address one of the future improvements described [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-kV0FS_LF2zvaRh_GhkV32Uqksm_Sq8SvnBBmRyxm30/edit#heading=h.h3ncjpk6ujqu), "A couple of less-intuitive pandas UDF types" (by zero323) together.
In short,
- Adds new way with type hints as an alternative and experimental way.
```python
pandas_udf(schema='...')
def func(c1: Series, c2: Series) -> DataFrame:
pass
```
- Replace and/or add an alias for three types below from UDF, and make them as separate standalone APIs. So, `pandas_udf` is now consistent with regular `udf`s and other expressions.
`df.mapInPandas(udf)` -replace-> `df.mapInPandas(f, schema)`
`df.groupby.apply(udf)` -alias-> `df.groupby.applyInPandas(f, schema)`
`df.groupby.cogroup.apply(udf)` -replace-> `df.groupby.cogroup.applyInPandas(f, schema)`
*`df.groupby.apply` was added from 2.3 while the other were added in the master only.
- No deprecation for the existing ways for now.
```python
pandas_udf(schema='...', functionType=PandasUDFType.SCALAR)
def func(c1, c2):
pass
```
If users are happy with this, I plan to deprecate the existing way and declare using type hints is not experimental anymore.
One design goal in this PR was that, avoid touching the internal (since we didn't deprecate the old ways for now), but supports type hints with a minimised changes only at the interface.
- Once we deprecate or remove the old ways, I think it requires another refactoring for the internal in the future. At the very least, we should rename internal pandas evaluation types.
- If users find this experimental type hints isn't quite helpful, we should simply revert the changes at the interface level.
### Why are the changes needed?
In order to address old design issues. Please see [the proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-kV0FS_LF2zvaRh_GhkV32Uqksm_Sq8SvnBBmRyxm30/edit?usp=sharing).
### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
For behaviour changes, No.
It adds new ways to use pandas UDFs by using type hints. See below.
**SCALAR**:
```python
pandas_udf(schema='...')
def func(c1: Series, c2: DataFrame) -> Series:
pass # DataFrame represents a struct column
```
**SCALAR_ITER**:
```python
pandas_udf(schema='...')
def func(iter: Iterator[Tuple[Series, DataFrame, ...]]) -> Iterator[Series]:
pass # Same as SCALAR but wrapped by Iterator
```
**GROUPED_AGG**:
```python
pandas_udf(schema='...')
def func(c1: Series, c2: DataFrame) -> int:
pass # DataFrame represents a struct column
```
**GROUPED_MAP**:
This was added in Spark 2.3 as of SPARK-20396. As described above, it keeps the existing behaviour. Additionally, we now have a new alias `groupby.applyInPandas` for `groupby.apply`. See the example below:
```python
def func(pdf):
return pdf
df.groupby("...").applyInPandas(func, schema=df.schema)
```
**MAP_ITER**: this is not a pandas UDF anymore
This was added in Spark 3.0 as of SPARK-28198; and this PR replaces the usages. See the example below:
```python
def func(iter):
for df in iter:
yield df
df.mapInPandas(func, df.schema)
```
**COGROUPED_MAP**: this is not a pandas UDF anymore
This was added in Spark 3.0 as of SPARK-27463; and this PR replaces the usages. See the example below:
```python
def asof_join(left, right):
return pd.merge_asof(left, right, on="...", by="...")
df1.groupby("...").cogroup(df2.groupby("...")).applyInPandas(asof_join, schema="...")
```
### How was this patch tested?
Unittests added and tested against Python 2.7, 3.6 and 3.7.
Closes#27165 from HyukjinKwon/revisit-pandas.
Authored-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
On the worker we express lambda functions as strings and then eval them to create a "mapper" function. This make the code hard to read & limits the # of arguments a udf can support to 256 for python <= 3.6.
This PR rewrites the mapper functions as nested functions instead of "lambda strings" and allows passing in more than 255 args.
### Why are the changes needed?
The jira ticket associated with this issue describes how MLflow uses udfs to consume columns as features. This pattern isn't unique and a limit of 255 features is quite low.
### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Users can now pass more than 255 cols to a udf function.
### How was this patch tested?
Added a unit test for passing in > 255 args to udf.
Closes#26442 from MrBago/replace-lambdas-on-worker.
Authored-by: Bago Amirbekian <bago@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: Xiangrui Meng <meng@databricks.com>
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
reorganize the packages of DS v2 interfaces/classes:
1. `org.spark.sql.connector.catalog`: put `TableCatalog`, `Table` and other related interfaces/classes
2. `org.spark.sql.connector.expression`: put `Expression`, `Transform` and other related interfaces/classes
3. `org.spark.sql.connector.read`: put `ScanBuilder`, `Scan` and other related interfaces/classes
4. `org.spark.sql.connector.write`: put `WriteBuilder`, `BatchWrite` and other related interfaces/classes
### Why are the changes needed?
Data Source V2 has evolved a lot. It's a bit weird that `Expression` is in `org.spark.sql.catalog.v2` and `Table` is in `org.spark.sql.sources.v2`.
### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
### How was this patch tested?
existing tests
Closes#25700 from cloud-fan/package.
Authored-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Make `spark.sql.crossJoin.enabled` default value true
### Why are the changes needed?
For implicit cross join, we can set up a watchdog to cancel it if running for a long time.
When "spark.sql.crossJoin.enabled" is false, because `CheckCartesianProducts` is implemented in logical plan stage, it may generate some mismatching error which may confuse end user:
* it's done in logical phase, so we may fail queries that can be executed via broadcast join, which is very fast.
* if we move the check to the physical phase, then a query may success at the beginning, and begin to fail when the table size gets larger (other people insert data to the table). This can be quite confusing.
* the CROSS JOIN syntax doesn't work well if join reorder happens.
* some non-equi-join will generate plan using cartesian product, but `CheckCartesianProducts` do not detect it and raise error.
So that in order to address this in simpler way, we can turn off showing this cross-join error by default.
For reference, I list some cases raising mismatching error here:
Providing:
```
spark.range(2).createOrReplaceTempView("sm1") // can be broadcast
spark.range(50000000).createOrReplaceTempView("bg1") // cannot be broadcast
spark.range(60000000).createOrReplaceTempView("bg2") // cannot be broadcast
```
1) Some join could be convert to broadcast nested loop join, but CheckCartesianProducts raise error. e.g.
```
select sm1.id, bg1.id from bg1 join sm1 where sm1.id < bg1.id
```
2) Some join will run by CartesianJoin but CheckCartesianProducts DO NOT raise error. e.g.
```
select bg1.id, bg2.id from bg1 join bg2 where bg1.id < bg2.id
```
### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
### How was this patch tested?
Closes#25520 from WeichenXu123/SPARK-28621.
Authored-by: WeichenXu <weichen.xu@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
PySpark worker daemon reads from stdin the worker PIDs to kill. 1bb60ab839/python/pyspark/daemon.py (L127)
However, the worker process is a forked process from the worker daemon process and we didn't close stdin on the child after fork. This means the child and user program can read stdin as well, which blocks daemon from receiving the PID to kill. This can cause issues because the task reaper might detect the task was not terminated and eventually kill the JVM.
This PR fix this by redirecting the standard input of the forked child to devnull.
## How was this patch tested?
Manually test.
In `pyspark`, run:
```
import subprocess
def task(_):
subprocess.check_output(["cat"])
sc.parallelize(range(1), 1).mapPartitions(task).count()
```
Before:
The job will get stuck and press Ctrl+C to exit the job but the python worker process do not exit.
After:
The job finish correctly. The "cat" print nothing (because the dummay stdin is "/dev/null").
The python worker process exit normally.
Please review https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html before opening a pull request.
Closes#25138 from WeichenXu123/SPARK-26175.
Authored-by: WeichenXu <weichen.xu@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
There is a bug in `ExtractPythonUDFs` that produces wrong result attributes. It causes a failure when using `PythonUDF`s among multiple child plans, e.g., join. An example is using `PythonUDF`s in join condition.
```python
>>> left = spark.createDataFrame([Row(a=1, a1=1, a2=1), Row(a=2, a1=2, a2=2)])
>>> right = spark.createDataFrame([Row(b=1, b1=1, b2=1), Row(b=1, b1=3, b2=1)])
>>> f = udf(lambda a: a, IntegerType())
>>> df = left.join(right, [f("a") == f("b"), left.a1 == right.b1])
>>> df.collect()
19/07/10 12:20:49 ERROR Executor: Exception in task 5.0 in stage 0.0 (TID 5)
java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.GenericInternalRow.genericGet(rows.scala:201)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.BaseGenericInternalRow.getAs(rows.scala:35)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.BaseGenericInternalRow.isNullAt(rows.scala:36)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.BaseGenericInternalRow.isNullAt$(rows.scala:36)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.GenericInternalRow.isNullAt(rows.scala:195)
at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.JoinedRow.isNullAt(JoinedRow.scala:70)
...
```
## How was this patch tested?
Added test.
Closes#25091 from viirya/SPARK-28323.
Authored-by: Liang-Chi Hsieh <viirya@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Bryan Cutler <cutlerb@gmail.com>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Currently, pretty skipped message added by f7435bec6a mechanism seems not working when xmlrunner is installed apparently.
This PR fixes two things:
1. When `xmlrunner` is installed, seems `xmlrunner` does not respect `vervosity` level in unittests (default is level 1).
So the output looks as below
```
Running tests...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
```
So it is not caught by our message detection mechanism.
2. If we manually set the `vervocity` level to `xmlrunner`, it prints messages as below:
```
test_mixed_udf (pyspark.sql.tests.test_pandas_udf_scalar.ScalarPandasUDFTests) ... SKIP (0.000s)
test_mixed_udf_and_sql (pyspark.sql.tests.test_pandas_udf_scalar.ScalarPandasUDFTests) ... SKIP (0.000s)
...
```
This is different in our Jenkins machine:
```
test_createDataFrame_column_name_encoding (pyspark.sql.tests.test_arrow.ArrowTests) ... skipped 'Pandas >= 0.23.2 must be installed; however, it was not found.'
test_createDataFrame_does_not_modify_input (pyspark.sql.tests.test_arrow.ArrowTests) ... skipped 'Pandas >= 0.23.2 must be installed; however, it was not found.'
...
```
Note that last `SKIP` is different. This PR fixes the regular expression to catch `SKIP` case as well.
## How was this patch tested?
Manually tested.
**Before:**
```
Starting test(python2.7): pyspark....
Finished test(python2.7): pyspark.... (0s)
...
Tests passed in 562 seconds
========================================================================
...
```
**After:**
```
Starting test(python2.7): pyspark....
Finished test(python2.7): pyspark.... (48s) ... 93 tests were skipped
...
Tests passed in 560 seconds
Skipped tests pyspark.... with python2.7:
pyspark...(...) ... SKIP (0.000s)
...
========================================================================
...
```
Closes#24927 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-28130.
Authored-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Not a big deal but it bugged me. This PR removes printing out plans in PySpark UDF tests.
Before:
```
Running tests...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Setting default log level to "WARN".
To adjust logging level use sc.setLogLevel(newLevel). For SparkR, use setLogLevel(newLevel).
== Parsed Logical Plan ==
GlobalLimit 1
+- LocalLimit 1
+- Project [id#668L, <lambda>(id#668L) AS copy#673]
+- Sort [id#668L ASC NULLS FIRST], true
+- Range (0, 10, step=1, splits=Some(4))
== Analyzed Logical Plan ==
id: bigint, copy: int
GlobalLimit 1
+- LocalLimit 1
+- Project [id#668L, <lambda>(id#668L) AS copy#673]
+- Sort [id#668L ASC NULLS FIRST], true
+- Range (0, 10, step=1, splits=Some(4))
== Optimized Logical Plan ==
GlobalLimit 1
+- LocalLimit 1
+- Project [id#668L, pythonUDF0#676 AS copy#673]
+- BatchEvalPython [<lambda>(id#668L)], [id#668L, pythonUDF0#676]
+- Range (0, 10, step=1, splits=Some(4))
== Physical Plan ==
CollectLimit 1
+- *(2) Project [id#668L, pythonUDF0#676 AS copy#673]
+- BatchEvalPython [<lambda>(id#668L)], [id#668L, pythonUDF0#676]
+- *(1) Range (0, 10, step=1, splits=4)
...........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 43 tests in 19.777s
```
After:
```
Running tests...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Setting default log level to "WARN".
To adjust logging level use sc.setLogLevel(newLevel). For SparkR, use setLogLevel(newLevel).
...........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 43 tests in 25.201s
```
## How was this patch tested?
N/A
Closes#24661 from HyukjinKwon/remove-explain-in-test.
Authored-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
With large partition, pyspark may exceeds executor memory limit and trigger out of memory for python 2.7.
This is because map() is used. Unlike in python3.x, python 2.7 map() will generate a list and need to read all data into memory.
The proposed fix will use imap in python 2.7 and it has been verified.
## How was this patch tested?
Manual test.
(Please explain how this patch was tested. E.g. unit tests, integration tests, manual tests)
(If this patch involves UI changes, please attach a screenshot; otherwise, remove this)
Please review http://spark.apache.org/contributing.html before opening a pull request.
Closes#23954 from TigerYang414/patch-1.
Lead-authored-by: TigerYang414 <39265202+TigerYang414@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <sean.owen@databricks.com>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
In SPARK-25314, we supported the scenario of having a python UDF that refers to attributes from both legs of a join condition by rewriting the plan to convert an inner join or left semi join to a filter over a cross join. In case of left semi join, this transformation may cause incorrect results when the right leg of join condition produces duplicate rows based on the join condition. This fix disallows the rewrite for left semi join and raises an error in the case like we do for other types of join. In future, we should have separate rule in optimizer to convert left semi join to inner join (I am aware of one case we could do it if we leverage informational constraint i.e when we know the right side does not produce duplicates).
**Python**
```SQL
>>> from pyspark import SparkContext
>>> from pyspark.sql import SparkSession, Column, Row
>>> from pyspark.sql.functions import UserDefinedFunction, udf
>>> from pyspark.sql.types import *
>>> from pyspark.sql.utils import AnalysisException
>>>
>>> spark.conf.set("spark.sql.crossJoin.enabled", "True")
>>> left = spark.createDataFrame([Row(lc1=1, lc2=1), Row(lc1=2, lc2=2)])
>>> right = spark.createDataFrame([Row(rc1=1, rc2=1), Row(rc1=1, rc2=1)])
>>> func = udf(lambda a, b: a == b, BooleanType())
>>> df = left.join(right, func("lc1", "rc1"), "leftsemi").show()
19/02/12 16:07:10 WARN PullOutPythonUDFInJoinCondition: The join condition:<lambda>(lc1#0L, rc1#4L) of the join plan contains PythonUDF only, it will be moved out and the join plan will be turned to cross join.
+---+---+
|lc1|lc2|
+---+---+
| 1| 1|
| 1| 1|
+---+---+
```
**Scala**
```SQL
scala> val left = Seq((1, 1), (2, 2)).toDF("lc1", "lc2")
left: org.apache.spark.sql.DataFrame = [lc1: int, lc2: int]
scala> val right = Seq((1, 1), (1, 1)).toDF("rc1", "rc2")
right: org.apache.spark.sql.DataFrame = [rc1: int, rc2: int]
scala> val equal = udf((p1: Integer, p2: Integer) => {
| p1 == p2
| })
equal: org.apache.spark.sql.expressions.UserDefinedFunction = SparkUserDefinedFunction($Lambda$2141/11016292394666f1b5,BooleanType,List(Some(Schema(IntegerType,true)), Some(Schema(IntegerType,true))),None,false,true)
scala> val df = left.join(right, equal(col("lc1"), col("rc1")), "leftsemi")
df: org.apache.spark.sql.DataFrame = [lc1: int, lc2: int]
scala> df.show()
+---+---+
|lc1|lc2|
+---+---+
| 1| 1|
+---+---+
```
## How was this patch tested?
Modified existing tests.
Closes#23769 from dilipbiswal/dkb_python_udf_in_join.
Authored-by: Dilip Biswal <dbiswal@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This is a regression introduced by https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22104 at Spark 2.4.0.
When we have Python UDF in subquery, we will hit an exception
```
Caused by: java.lang.ClassCastException: org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.AttributeReference cannot be cast to org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.PythonUDF
at scala.collection.immutable.Stream.map(Stream.scala:414)
at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.python.EvalPythonExec.$anonfun$doExecute$2(EvalPythonExec.scala:98)
at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.$anonfun$mapPartitions$2(RDD.scala:815)
...
```
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22104 turned `ExtractPythonUDFs` from a physical rule to optimizer rule. However, there is a difference between a physical rule and optimizer rule. A physical rule always runs once, an optimizer rule may be applied twice on a query tree even the rule is located in a batch that only runs once.
For a subquery, the `OptimizeSubqueries` rule will execute the entire optimizer on the query plan inside subquery. Later on subquery will be turned to joins, and the optimizer rules will be applied to it again.
Unfortunately, the `ExtractPythonUDFs` rule is not idempotent. When it's applied twice on a query plan inside subquery, it will produce a malformed plan. It extracts Python UDF from Python exec plans.
This PR proposes 2 changes to be double safe:
1. `ExtractPythonUDFs` should skip python exec plans, to make the rule idempotent
2. `ExtractPythonUDFs` should skip subquery
## How was this patch tested?
a new test.
Closes#23248 from cloud-fan/python.
Authored-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22326 made a mistake that, not all python UDFs are unevaluable in join condition. Only python UDFs that refer to attributes from both join side are unevaluable.
This PR fixes this mistake.
## How was this patch tested?
a new test
Closes#23153 from cloud-fan/join.
Authored-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR continues to break down a big large file into smaller files. See https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23021. It targets to follow https://github.com/numpy/numpy/tree/master/numpy.
Basically this PR proposes to break down `pyspark/tests.py` into ...:
```
pyspark
...
├── testing
...
│ └── utils.py
├── tests
│ ├── __init__.py
│ ├── test_appsubmit.py
│ ├── test_broadcast.py
│ ├── test_conf.py
│ ├── test_context.py
│ ├── test_daemon.py
│ ├── test_join.py
│ ├── test_profiler.py
│ ├── test_rdd.py
│ ├── test_readwrite.py
│ ├── test_serializers.py
│ ├── test_shuffle.py
│ ├── test_taskcontext.py
│ ├── test_util.py
│ └── test_worker.py
...
```
## How was this patch tested?
Existing tests should cover.
`cd python` and .`/run-tests-with-coverage`. Manually checked they are actually being ran.
Each test (not officially) can be ran via:
```bash
SPARK_TESTING=1 ./bin/pyspark pyspark.tests.test_context
```
Note that if you're using Mac and Python 3, you might have to `OBJC_DISABLE_INITIALIZE_FORK_SAFETY=YES`.
Closes#23033 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-26036.
Authored-by: hyukjinkwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: hyukjinkwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This is the official first attempt to break huge single `tests.py` file - I did it locally before few times and gave up for some reasons. Now, currently it really makes the unittests super hard to read and difficult to check. To me, it even bothers me to to scroll down the big file. It's one single 7000 lines file!
This is not only readability issue. Since one big test takes most of tests time, the tests don't run in parallel fully - although it will costs to start and stop the context.
We could pick up one example and follow. Given my investigation, the current style looks closer to NumPy structure and looks easier to follow. Please see https://github.com/numpy/numpy/tree/master/numpy.
Basically this PR proposes to break down `pyspark/sql/tests.py` into ...:
```bash
pyspark
...
├── sql
...
│ ├── tests # Includes all tests broken down from 'pyspark/sql/tests.py'
│ │ │ # Each matchs to module in 'pyspark/sql'. Additionally, some logical group can
│ │ │ # be added. For instance, 'test_arrow.py', 'test_datasources.py' ...
│ │ ├── __init__.py
│ │ ├── test_appsubmit.py
│ │ ├── test_arrow.py
│ │ ├── test_catalog.py
│ │ ├── test_column.py
│ │ ├── test_conf.py
│ │ ├── test_context.py
│ │ ├── test_dataframe.py
│ │ ├── test_datasources.py
│ │ ├── test_functions.py
│ │ ├── test_group.py
│ │ ├── test_pandas_udf.py
│ │ ├── test_pandas_udf_grouped_agg.py
│ │ ├── test_pandas_udf_grouped_map.py
│ │ ├── test_pandas_udf_scalar.py
│ │ ├── test_pandas_udf_window.py
│ │ ├── test_readwriter.py
│ │ ├── test_serde.py
│ │ ├── test_session.py
│ │ ├── test_streaming.py
│ │ ├── test_types.py
│ │ ├── test_udf.py
│ │ └── test_utils.py
...
├── testing # Includes testing utils that can be used in unittests.
│ ├── __init__.py
│ └── sqlutils.py
...
```
## How was this patch tested?
Existing tests should cover.
`cd python` and `./run-tests-with-coverage`. Manually checked they are actually being ran.
Each test (not officially) can be ran via:
```
SPARK_TESTING=1 ./bin/pyspark pyspark.sql.tests.test_pandas_udf_scalar
```
Note that if you're using Mac and Python 3, you might have to `OBJC_DISABLE_INITIALIZE_FORK_SAFETY=YES`.
Closes#23021 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-25344.
Authored-by: hyukjinkwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: hyukjinkwon <gurwls223@apache.org>
Takuya UESHIN
HyukjinKwon
Bago Amirbekian
Wenchen Fan
WeichenXu
Liang-Chi Hsieh
TigerYang414
Dilip Biswal