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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Add limited support for captured vars and athrow #5487
Add limited support for captured vars and athrow #5487
Changes from 1 commit
4282a7a
158dbca
af3b63c
1e46fe5
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe one approach here would be to code up a new catalyst node
RaiseErrorV2
orRaiseSpecificError
or something like this, where it has the CPUeval
anddoGenCode
, as it would be very much likeRaiseError
, but it has an extra parameter which is the specific type of exception to throw. It would then instantiate this exception and throw the specific type.For the gpu, we could replace this new node with the GPU specific type, and for the CPU it would work the way the caller intended. @jlowe @revans2 for some 👀
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
After discussing with @revans2 we were thinking it's OK if the exceptions are not the same for now. Could we make a note of this in: https://github.com/NVIDIA/spark-rapids/blob/branch-22.06/docs/additional-functionality/udf-to-catalyst-expressions.md?
We may need to revisit this if someone needs
SparkException
thrown in the future.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Updated
udf-to-catalyst-expressions.md