Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[SPARK-50792][SQL] Format binary data as a binary literal in JDBC. #49452

Open
wants to merge 11 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sunxiaoguang
Copy link

@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang commented Jan 11, 2025

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Format binary data as a binary literal in JDBC.

Why are the changes needed?

The binary data is not handled to format it as binary literal in JDBC connectors
These are the steps to reproduce.

  1. CREATE TABLE test_binary_literal(b BINARY);
  2. INSERT INTO test_binary_literal VALUES(x'010203');
  3. SELECT * FROM test_binary_literal WHERE b=x'010203';
image

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

'No'

How was this patch tested?

Added new integration tests

Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

'No'

@github-actions github-actions bot added the SQL label Jan 11, 2025
@beliefer beliefer changed the title [SPARK-50792] Format binary data as a binary literal in JDBC. [SPARK-50792][SQL] Format binary data as a binary literal in JDBC. Jan 11, 2025
val select = s"SELECT * FROM $catalogName.$tableName WHERE binary_col = $binary"
assert(spark.sql(select).collect().length === 1, s"Binary literal test failed: $select")
}
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add the similar test case into JDBCV2Suite.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please prepare data at tablePreparation.

Copy link
Author

@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang Jan 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

tablePreparation

Sorry, I'm not quite familiar with the test infrastructure. In case I make mistakes, let me confirm this question.

To mixin the tablePreparation and dataPreparation from trait defined in V2JDBCTest.scala, we need to update all the integration tests and call the these functions defined in trait.

And duplicate the extra call to multiple integration tests is OK, am I right?

Copy link
Author

@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang Jan 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hm, Just realized I have to use Spark SQL to create table and use the types defined in Spark SQL. If I prepare table and data in tablePreparation and dataPreparation, that will have to be database specific. The code will definitely have to be duplicated for connectors of all the databases.

Copy link
Contributor

@beliefer beliefer Jan 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. If we update the basic class JdbcDialect, we should test all the built-in integration tests.
tablePreparation used to customize the DDL, I'm afraid Spark SQL can covers all the built-in integration tests. But you could do your best effort, let's see the result and make the decision.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wait, just realized each dialect embeds a builder which can override the implementation. Let me have a try.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oracle support is ready for review, PTAL. Thanks.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can override visitBinaryComparison in OracleSQLBuilder.

Copy link
Author

@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang Jan 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are couple threads discussing this topic. Let me copy the comment in case it's missed.

We can only rewrite comparison when one of the arguments is BLOB. For other cases, we have to use existing implementation. But unfortunately, the signature of visitBinaryComparison is accepting everything in string which loss the type information to understand if one of the arguments is binary type.

  protected String visitBinaryComparison(String name, String l, String r) {
    if (name.equals("<=>")) {
      return "((" + l + " IS NOT NULL AND " + r + " IS NOT NULL AND " + l + " = " + r + ") " +
              "OR (" + l + " IS NULL AND " + r + " IS NULL))";
    }
    return l + " " + name + " " + r;
  }

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All tests passed, but downloading report failed. We can rerun the whole test again to clear all the checks, but it takes quite some time to finish.
https://github.com/sunxiaoguang/spark/actions/runs/12744731853

sunxiaoguang added a commit to sunxiaoguang/spark that referenced this pull request Jan 11, 2025
sunxiaoguang added a commit to sunxiaoguang/spark that referenced this pull request Jan 11, 2025
@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang force-pushed the fix_binary_literal_format_in_jdbc branch from f729330 to 8ddfcc2 Compare January 11, 2025 17:16
// Unfornately, Oracle can only compare two BLOBs with a special function dbms_lob.compare
// The V2ExpressionSQLBuilder can not support rewriting the '=' operator.
// We don't test binary data on Oracle and do not support binary data on Oracle.
if (!this.isInstanceOf[OracleIntegrationSuite]) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test case skips the Oracle, but the users still possible use this case.

Copy link
Author

@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang Jan 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, that requires a significant change in how V2ExpressionSQLBuilder works. The binary literal was not working before this PR anyway. We can make it work at least on other databases this time. And propose another design changes to V2ExpressionSQLBuilder to make it flexible enable to support cases like this.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As Oracle is supported, the test is now enabled for Oracle.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's not a good idea if the bug still exists when using oracle dialect. Is there a way to fix the bug?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, that requires a significant change in how V2ExpressionSQLBuilder works. The binary literal was not working before this PR anyway. We can make it work at least on other databases this time. And propose another design changes to V2ExpressionSQLBuilder to make it flexible enable to support cases like this.

Why we need change V2ExpressionSQLBuilder? Please describe the detail.

Copy link
Author

@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang Jan 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry for the confusion; I didn't check the inheritance structure initially. After realizing that each dialect embeds a builder inherited from V2ExpressionSQLBuilder, I made all the changes in OracleDialect. PTAL

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

BTW: I just changed test to verify the returned result in addition. It's going to run for a while.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All tests passed, but downloading report failed. We can rerun the whole test again to clear all the checks, but it takes quite some time to finish.
https://github.com/sunxiaoguang/spark/actions/runs/12744731853

}
}

override def build(expr: Expression): String = expr match {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You just need override visitBinaryComparison

Copy link
Author

@sunxiaoguang sunxiaoguang Jan 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can only rewrite comparison when one of the arguments is BLOB. For other cases, we have to use existing implementation. But unfortunately, the signature of visitBinaryComparison is accepting everything in string which loss the type information to understand if one of the arguments is binary type.

  protected String visitBinaryComparison(String name, String l, String r) {
    if (name.equals("<=>")) {
      return "((" + l + " IS NOT NULL AND " + r + " IS NOT NULL AND " + l + " = " + r + ") " +
              "OR (" + l + " IS NULL AND " + r + " IS NULL))";
    }
    return l + " " + name + " " + r;
  }

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All tests passed, but downloading report failed. We can rerun the whole test again to clear all the checks, but it takes quite some time to finish.
https://github.com/sunxiaoguang/spark/actions/runs/12744731853

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants