+1 Thanks John Zhuge
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 9:47 AM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 on the direction. It's great that Spark has standardized the error code > so that Iceberg didn't have to rely on error messages. > > Yufei > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 8:47 AM rdb...@gmail.com <rdb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> This looks like a good improvement to me. Thanks, Huaxin! >> >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 11:37 PM huaxin gao <huaxin.ga...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> While working on integrating Spark 4.0 with Iceberg, I noticed that >>> error conditions in the Spark module are primarily validated through the >>> content of error messages. I need to revise some of the validation because >>> the error messages have changed in Spark 4.0. Spark has standardized error >>> handling by introducing error classes and SQLSTATE codes since 3.1. I would >>> like to align the error handling in the Iceberg Spark module with Spark's >>> standard error handling framework, specifically by shifting from validating >>> error message content to validating error classes and SQLSTATE codes. I >>> have prepared a quick write-up >>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/11qHUiCcKMJ-xAyfL__Yv7B1b5N-80-GIwE8AV96A2Ac/edit?usp=sharing> >>> for background information and an example. Please let me know what you >>> think. If there are no objections to this proposal, I will begin updating >>> the error handling in the Spark module. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Huaxin >>> >>> >>
