How can I grab the columns of many tables efficiently in Spark? - apache-spark

I want to find all columns in some Hive tables that meet a certain criteria. However, the code I've written to do this is very slow, since Spark isn't a particularly big fan of looping:
matches = {}
for table in table_list:
matching_cols = [c for c in spark.read.table(table).columns if substring in c]
if matching_cols:
matches[table] = matching_cols
I want something like:
matches = {'table1': ['column1', 'column2'], 'table2': ['column2']}
How can I more efficiently achieve the same result?

A colleague just figured it out. This is the revised solution:
matches = {}
for table in table_list:
matching_cols = spark.sql("describe {}".format(table)) \
.where(col('col_name').rlike(substring)) \
.collect()
if matching_cols:
matches[table] = [c.col_name for c in matching_cols]
The key difference here is that Spark seems to be caching partition information in my prior example, hence why it was getting more and more bogged down with each loop. Accessing the metadata to scrape columns, rather than the table itself, bypasses that issue.

If table fields has comments above code will get into issues on extra info(comment), Also side note HBase link tables will be issue too...
Example:
create TABLE deck_test (
COLOR string COMMENT 'COLOR Address',
SUIT string COMMENT '4 type Suits',
PIP string)
ROW FORMAT DELIMITED FIELDS TERMINATED by '|'
STORED AS TEXTFILE;
describe deck_test;
color string COLOR Address
suit string 4 type Suits
pip string
to handle comments issue small change may help...
matches = {}
for table in table_list:
matching_cols = spark.sql("show columns in {}".format(table)).where(col('result').rlike(substring)).collect()
if matching_cols:
matches[table] = [c.col_name for c in matching_cols]

Related

Delta table merge on multiple columns

i have a table which has primary key as multiple columns so I need to perform the merge logic on multiple columns
DeltaTable.forPath(spark, "path")
.as("data")
.merge(
finalDf1.as("updates"),
"data.column1 = updates.column1 AND data.column2 = updates.column2 AND data.column3 = updates.column3 AND data.column4 = updates.column4 AND data.column5 = updates.column5")
.whenMatched
.updateAll()
.whenNotMatched
.insertAll()
.execute()
When I check the data counts it is not updating as expected.
Could someone help me here on this?
Please try also approach like in this example: https://docs.databricks.com/_static/notebooks/merge-in-cdc.html
Create a changes tables with additional columns which you will note
if a row is new (be inserted)
old (primary key exists) and nothing has changed
old (primary key exists) but other fields needs an update
and then use additional conditions on merge, for example:
.whenMatched("s.new = true")
.insert()
.whenMatched("s.updated = true")
.updateExpr(Map("key" -> "s.key", "value" -> "s.newValue"))
How are you counting your rows?
One thing to keep in mind is that directly reading and counting from the parquet files produced by Delta Lake will potentially give you a different result than reading the rows through the delta table interface. Remember that delta keeps a log and supports time travel so it does store copies of rows as they change over time.
Here's a way to accurately count the current rows in a delta table:
deltaTable = DeltaTable.forPath(spark,<path to your delta table>)
deltaTable.toDF().count()

Postgresql - IN clause optimization for more than 3000 values

I have an application where the user will be uploading an excel file(.xlsx or .csv) with more than 10,000 rows with a single column "partId" containing the values to look for in database
I will be reading the excel values and store it in list object and pass the list as parameter to the Spring Boot JPA repository find method that builds IN clause query internally:
// Read excel file
stream = new ByteArrayInputStream(file.getBytes());
wb = WorkbookFactory.create(stream);
org.apache.poi.ss.usermodel.Sheet sheet = wb.getSheetAt(wb.getActiveSheetIndex());
Iterator<Row> rowIterator = sheet.rowIterator();
while(rowIterator.hasNext()) {
Row row = rowIterator.next();
Cell cell = row.getCell(0);
System.out.println(cell.getStringCellValue());
vinList.add(cell.getStringCellValue());
}
//JPA repository method that I used
findByPartIdInAndSecondaryId(List<String> partIds);
I read in many articles and experienced the same in above case that using IN query is inefficient for huge list of data.
How can I optimize the above scenario or write a new optimized query?
Also, please let me know if there is optimized way of reading an excel file than the above mentioned code snippet
It would be much helpful!! Thanks in advance!
If the list is truly huge, you will never be lightning fast.
I see several options:
Send a query with a large IN list, as you mention in your question.
Construct a statement that is a join with a large VALUES clause:
SELECT ... FROM mytable
JOIN (VALUES (42), (101), (43), ...) AS tmp(col)
ON mytable.id = tmp.col;
Create a temporary table with the values and join with that:
BEGIN;
CREATE TEMP TABLE tmp(col bigint) ON COMMIT DROP;
Then either
COPY tmp FROM STDIN; -- if Spring supports COPY
or
INSERT INTO tmp VALUES (42), (101), (43), ...; -- if not
Then
ANALYZE tmp; -- for good statistics
SELECT ... FROM mytable
JOIN tmp ON mytable.id = tmp.col;
COMMIT; -- drops the temporary table
Which of these is fastest is best determined by trial and error for your case; I don't think that it can be said that one of the methods will always beat the others.
Some considerations:
Solutions 1. and 2. may result in very large statements, while solution 3. can be split in smaller chunks.
Solution 3. will very likely be slower unless the list is truly large.

How to use dictionary values in dynamic spark sql query

Iam new to python please help me in below problem
I have a dictionary as below
city = {"AP":"VIZAG","TELANGANA":"HYDERABAD"}
and also I have a list which I need to loop for all state tables as below
states=['AP','HYDERABAD']
for st in states:
df = spark.sql(f"""select * from {st} where city = {city}["{st}"]""")
In above df I am trying to filter city based on dictionary value as per state. But I am not able to do it
New answer
By combining two filter conditions you can do the expected filtering.
selected_city = 'AP'
df = df.filter(
(F.col('city') == selected_city)
& (F.col('state') == cities[selected_city])
)
Old answer
It is a simple change: You can use isin to filter a column based on a list [Docs].
cities = list(city.keys())
df = df.filter(F.col('city').isin(cities))
If you want to construct more complex conditions based on a dictionary see this question.
[Edit] Updated answer based on OPs comment. Will leave the old one in there for completeness.

How can you update values in a dataset?

So as far as I know Apache Spark doesn't has a functionality that imitates the update SQL command. Like, I can change a single value in a column given a certain condition. The only way around that is to use the following command I was instructed to use (here in Stackoverflow): withColumn(columnName, where('condition', value));
However, the condition should be of column type, meaning I have to use the built in column filtering functions apache has (equalTo, isin, lt, gt, etc). Is there a way I can instead use an SQL statement instead of those built in functions?
The problem is I'm given a text file with SQL statements, like WHERE ID > 5 or WHERE AGE != 50, etc. Then I have to label values based on those conditions, and I thought of following the withColumn() approach but I can't plug-in an SQL statement in that function. Any idea of how I can go around this?
I found a way to go around this:
You want to split your dataset into two sets: the values you want to update and the values you don't want to update
Dataset<Row> valuesToUpdate = dataset.filter('conditionToFilterValues');
Dataset<Row> valuesNotToUpdate = dataset.except(valuesToUpdate);
valueToUpdate = valueToUpdate.withColumn('updatedColumn', lit('updateValue'));
Dataset<Row> updatedDataset = valuesNotToUpdate.union(valueToUpdate);
This, however, doesn't keep the same order of records as the original dataset, so if order is of importance to you, this won't suffice your needs.
In PySpark you have to use .subtract instead of .except
If you are using DataFrame, you can register that dataframe as temp table,
using df.registerTempTable("events")
Then you can query like,
sqlContext.sql("SELECT * FROM events "+)
when clause translates into case clause which you can relate to SQL case clause.
Example
scala> val condition_1 = when(col("col_1").isNull,"NA").otherwise("AVAILABLE")
condition_1: org.apache.spark.sql.Column = CASE WHEN (col_1 IS NULL) THEN NA ELSE AVAILABLE END
or you can chain when clause as well
scala> val condition_2 = when(col("col_1") === col("col_2"),"EQUAL").when(col("col_1") > col("col_2"),"GREATER").
| otherwise("LESS")
condition_2: org.apache.spark.sql.Column = CASE WHEN (col_1 = col_2) THEN EQUAL WHEN (col_1 > col_2) THEN GREATER ELSE LESS END
scala> val new_df = df.withColumn("condition_1",condition_1).withColumn("condition_2",condition_2)
Still if you want to use table, then you can register your dataframe / dataset as temperory table and perform sql queries
df.createOrReplaceTempView("tempTable")//spark 2.1 +
df.registerTempTable("tempTable")//spark 1.6
Now, you can perform sql queries
spark.sql("your queries goes here with case clause and where condition!!!")//spark 2.1
sqlContest.sql("your queries goes here with case clause and where condition!!!")//spark 1.6
If you are using java dataset
you can update dataset by below.
here is the code
Dataset ratesFinal1 = ratesFinal.filter(" on_behalf_of_comp_id != 'COMM_DERIVS' ");
ratesFinal1 = ratesFinal1.filter(" status != 'Hit/Lift' ");
Dataset ratesFinalSwap = ratesFinal1.filter (" on_behalf_of_comp_id in ('SAPPHIRE','BOND') and cash_derivative != 'cash'");
ratesFinalSwap = ratesFinalSwap.withColumn("ins_type_str",functions.lit("SWAP"));
adding new column with value from existing column
ratesFinalSTW = ratesFinalSTW.withColumn("action", ratesFinalSTW.col("status"));

non-ordinal access to rows returned by Spark SQL query

In the Spark documentation, it is stated that the result of a Spark SQL query is a SchemaRDD. Each row of this SchemaRDD can in turn be accessed by ordinal. I am wondering if there is any way to access the columns using the field names of the case class on top of which the SQL query was built. I appreciate the fact that the case class is not associated with the result, especially if I have selected individual columns and/or aliased them: however, some way to access fields by name rather than ordinal would be convenient.
A simple way is to use the "language-integrated" select method on the resulting SchemaRDD to select the column(s) you want -- this still gives you a SchemaRDD, and if you select more than one column then you will still need to use ordinals, but you can always select one column at a time. Example:
// setup and some data
val sqlContext = new org.apache.spark.sql.SQLContext(sc)
import sqlContext._
case class Score(name: String, value: Int)
val scores =
sc.textFile("data.txt").map(_.split(",")).map(s => Score(s(0),s(1).trim.toInt))
scores.registerAsTable("scores")
// initial query
val original =
sqlContext.sql("Select value AS myVal, name FROM scores WHERE name = 'foo'")
// now a simple "language-integrated" query -- no registration required
val secondary = original.select('myVal)
secondary.collect().foreach(println)
Now secondary is a SchemaRDD with just one column, and it works despite the alias in the original query.
Edit: but note that you can register the resulting SchemaRDD and query it with straight SQL syntax without needing another case class.
original.registerAsTable("original")
val secondary = sqlContext.sql("select myVal from original")
secondary.collect().foreach(println)
Second edit: When processing an RDD one row at a time, it's possible to access the columns by name by using the matching syntax:
val secondary = original.map {case Row(myVal: Int, _) => myVal}
although this could get cumbersome if the right hand side of the '=>' requires access to a lot of the columns, as they would each need to be matched on the left. (This from a very useful comment in the source code for the Row companion object)

Resources