[SPARK-52354] Add type coercion to UnionLoop #51063
Open
+141
−16
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
cloud-fan
reviewed
Jun 6, 2025
| case s: UnionLoop | ||
| if s.childrenResolved && s.anchor.output.length == s.recursion.output.length | ||
| && !s.resolved => | ||
| val incompatibleAttributes = s.anchor.output.zip(s.recursion.output).filter { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it should be simpler
val casts = s.recursion.output.zip(s.anchor.output.map(_.dataType)).map {
case (attr, dt) => implicitCast(attr, dt).getOrElse(attr)
}
s.copy(recursion = Project(casts, s.recursion))
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
Add a new rule to WidenSetOperationTypes to work for UnionLoop.
Why are the changes needed?
To have UNION ALL in recursive CTEs behave in the same way regarding type coercion as UNION ALL outside the context of rCTEs.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
New Golden file tests.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.