[SPARK-52407][SQL][FOLLOWUP] Expression description fix for ThetaIntersectionAgg #53552
+1
−1
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
This PR corrects the @ExpressionDescription usage text for theta_intersection_agg function. The usage description was updated from:
_FUNC_(expr, lgNomEntries)to:
_FUNC_(expr)Why are the changes needed?
The previous documentation incorrectly showed lgNomEntries as a parameter for theta_intersection_agg. This function only accepts a single expression parameter, unlike theta_sketch_agg and theta_union_agg which both accept an optional lgNomEntries parameter. This change ensures the documentation accurately reflects the function's signature and provides a clearer description of what the function does.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Yes - the documentation shown in SQL help/describe function output for theta_intersection_agg will now correctly show only one parameter instead of two, and will include a more descriptive explanation of the function's behavior.
How was this patch tested?
The change is documentation-only. The function signature and implementation remain unchanged. Existing tests for theta_intersection_agg continue to validate the correct behavior.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No