[KSHC] Unify the exception handling of v1 and v2 during dropDatabase #5225
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5225 +/- ##
======================================
Coverage 0.00% 0.00%
======================================
Files 589 589
Lines 33311 33307 -4
Branches 4399 4397 -2
======================================
+ Misses 33311 33307 -4
... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. It also helps for resolving the blocker issue for enabling tests on Scala 2.13 in the future, as discovered and discussed in #5196.
| val e = intercept[IllegalStateException] { | ||
| val e = intercept[AnalysisException] { | ||
| sql(s"DROP NAMESPACE $catalogName.$namespace") | ||
| } | ||
| assert(e.getMessage.contains(s"Namespace $namespace is not empty")) | ||
| if (SPARK_RUNTIME_VERSION >= "3.4") { | ||
| assert(e.getMessage().contains( | ||
| s"[SCHEMA_NOT_EMPTY] Cannot drop a schema `$namespace` because it contains objects")) | ||
| } else { | ||
| assert(e.getMessage().contains("Use CASCADE option to drop a non-empty database")) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
interceptContains[AnalysisException] {
sql(s"DROP NAMESPACE $catalogName.$namespace")
}(if (SPARK_RUNTIME_VERSION >= "3.4") {
s"[SCHEMA_NOT_EMPTY] Cannot drop a schema `$namespace` because it contains objects"
} else {
"Use CASCADE option to drop a non-empty database"
})
There's a new-added helper method interceptContains available in AssertionUtils on the master branch that helps simplify asserting exception messages.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. I think it's ready to merge.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks bowen, waitting CI
|
Thanks, merged to master(1.8.0). |
Why are the changes needed?
This PR aims to unify the exception handling of v1 and v2 during dropDatabase
How was this patch tested?
Add some test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive cases if possible
Add screenshots for manual tests if appropriate
Run test locally before make a pull request
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No