[GitHub] [spark] amaliujia commented on a diff in pull request #40400: [SPARK-41359][SQL] Use `PhysicalDataType` instead of DataType in UnsafeRow

["amaliujia (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

amaliujia commented on code in PR #40400:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/40400#discussion_r1151093946


##########
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/types/PhysicalDataType.scala:
##########
@@ -19,43 +19,46 @@ package org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.types
 
 import org.apache.spark.sql.types._
 
+
 sealed abstract class PhysicalDataType
 
+sealed abstract class PhysicalPrimitiveType extends PhysicalDataType

Review Comment:
   Just for my own education: 
   
   what is the pros/cons of adding `class` versus `trait` to act as base and shared interface here? 
   
   I am thinking to move some DataType stuff to here and one example is the Ordering implementation which I thought to define as a trait but not a `PhysicalDataTypeWithOrdering` class
   
   ```
   trait Ordering {
     private[sql] type InternalType
     private[sql] val tag: TypeTag[InternalType]
     private[sql] val ordering: Ordering[InternalType]
   }
   ```



##########
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/types/PhysicalDataType.scala:
##########
@@ -19,43 +19,46 @@ package org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.types
 
 import org.apache.spark.sql.types._
 
+
 sealed abstract class PhysicalDataType
 
+sealed abstract class PhysicalPrimitiveType extends PhysicalDataType

Review Comment:
   cc @cloud-fan 



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org