cashmand opened a new pull request, #50270:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/50270
<!--
Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines:
https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html
2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR:
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html
3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g.,
'[WIP][SPARK-XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
4. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
5. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes.
6. If possible, provide a concise example to reproduce the issue for a
faster review.
7. If you want to add a new configuration, please read the guideline first
for naming configurations in
'core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/internal/config/ConfigEntry.scala'.
8. If you want to add or modify an error type or message, please read the
guideline first in
'common/utils/src/main/resources/error/README.md'.
-->
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Adds Variant support for the nanosecond precision timestamp types in
https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/commit/25f05e73d8cd7f5c83532ce51cb4f4de8ba5f2a2,
similar to the UUID support added in
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/50025.
Cast support: the PR allows casting to any type that the corresponding
microsecond value supports. For strings, we retain the nanosecond precision,
and for all other casts, we truncate to a microsecond timestamp and then cast.
An alternative is to round to the nearest microsecond, but truncation is
consistent with our current timestamp-to-integer cast, which truncates to the
nearest second. We could also consider disabling some of these casts, but I
didn't see a strong argument to.
SchemaOfVariant: The types are reported as `timestamp_nanos` and
`timestamp_nanos_ntz`. If Spark eventually adds native support for these types,
we would either need to use these names, or change the behaviour of
SchemaOfVariant.
### Why are the changes needed?
Support Variant values written by other tools.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
Yes, operations on Variant binaries with these types would have previously
failed, and will now succeed.
### How was this patch tested?
Unit tests.
### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
