Uploaded image for project: 'Spark'
  1. Spark
  2. SPARK-22335

Union for DataSet uses column order instead of types for union


    • Type: Documentation
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 2.2.0
    • Fix Version/s: 2.3.0
    • Component/s: SQL
    • Labels:


      I see union uses column order for a DF. This to me is "fine" since they aren't typed.
      However, for a dataset which is supposed to be strongly typed it is actually giving the wrong result. If you try to access the members by name, it will use the order. Heres is a reproducible case. 2.2.0

        case class AB(a : String, b : String)
        val abDf = sc.parallelize(List(("aThing","bThing"))).toDF("a", "b")
        val baDf = sc.parallelize(List(("bThing","aThing"))).toDF("b", "a")
        abDf.union(baDf).show() // as linked ticket states, its "Not a problem"
        val abDs = abDf.as[AB]
        val baDs = baDf.as[AB]
        abDs.union(baDs).show()  // This gives wrong result since a Dataset[AB] should be correctly mapped by type, not by column order
        abDs.union(baDs).map(_.a).show() // This gives wrong result since a Dataset[AB] should be correctly mapped by type, not by column order
         abDs.union(baDs).rdd.take(2) // This also gives wrong result
        baDs.map(_.a).show() // However, this gives the correct result, even though columns were out of order.
        abDs.map(_.a).show() // This is correct too
        baDs.select("a","b").as[AB].union(abDs).show() // This is the same workaround for linked issue, slightly modified.  However this seems wrong since its supposed to be strongly typed
        baDs.rdd.toDF().as[AB].union(abDs).show()  // This however gives correct result, which is logically inconsistent behavior
        abDs.rdd.union(baDs.rdd).toDF().show() // Simpler example that gives correct result

      So its inconsistent and a bug IMO. And I'm not sure that the suggested work around is really fair, since I'm supposed to be getting of type `AB`. More importantly I think the issue is bigger when you consider that it happens even if you read from parquet (as you would expect). And that its inconsistent when going to/from rdd.

      I imagine its just lazily converting to typed DS instead of initially. So either that typing could be prioritized to happen before the union or unioning of DF could be done with column order taken into account. Again, this is speculation..


          Issue Links



              • Assignee:
                viirya Liang-Chi Hsieh
                CBribiescas Carlos Bribiescas
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                8 Start watching this issue


                • Created: