[SPARK-53244] [SQL] Don't store dual-run enabled and tentative mode enabled confs during view creation #51972
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mihailoale-db
changed the title
Contributor
Author
|
Failures not related to the PR. @cloud-fan could you ptal? Thanks! |
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2025
Contributor
|
failed tests unrelated, thanks, merging to master! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
If a
ANALYZER_DUAL_RUN_LEGACY_AND_SINGLE_PASS_RESOLVERconf is explicitly set during view creation, we store it, but we might not want to. When we query that view, stored value is used, which we forbid in order to avoid any accidental failures. We do the same forANALYZER_SINGLE_PASS_RESOLVER_ENABLED_TENTATIVELY.Why are the changes needed?
To make single-pass resolver runs more stable.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
N/A
How was this patch tested?
Added tests.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.