Скачать или смотреть How to Use not exists in Spark SQL: A Solution for Filtering Records

Discover how to effectively replace the `not in` clause with `not exists` in Spark SQL for clearer and efficient queries.
---
This video is based on the question https://stackoverflow.com/q/64253248/ asked by the user 'Aleksander Lipka' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/4271491/ ) and on the answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/64253343/ provided by the user 'GMB' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/10676716/ ) at 'Stack Overflow' website. Thanks to these great users and Stackexchange community for their contributions.

Visit these links for original content and any more details, such as alternate solutions, latest updates/developments on topic, comments, revision history etc. For example, the original title of the Question was: Spark: Equivalent to not in

Also, Content (except music) licensed under CC BY-SA https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/l...
The original Question post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license, and the original Answer post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license.

If anything seems off to you, please feel free to write me at vlogize [AT] gmail [DOT] com.
---
Understanding the Problem: Filtering Records in Spark SQL

When working with Spark SQL, many users encounter challenges with the WHERE clause, particularly with filtering out records that exist in another dataset. A common scenario is needing to filter a set of clients based on their absence in a related table. In this blog, we'll focus on a specific question where the user had a problem running a query due to the use of the not in clause. Let's take a closer look at the issue:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

The user expects this query to return certain records from the CLIENT_SUB table, but finds that it doesn’t yield any results.

Exploring the Solution: Using not exists

The solution to this problem is to replace the not in clause with the more efficient and reliable not exists clause. Let's break down why this adjustment not only fixes potential issues but also optimizes performance.

Why Choose not exists

Null-Safety: Unlike not in, which can lead to unexpected results when there are NULL values, not exists is NULL-safe. This means if there's a match with NULL in the subquery, it won't incorrectly filter out records.

Performance: The not exists clause is generally more efficient in terms of execution, especially when dealing with larger datasets. This efficiency can be particularly beneficial as your data grows.

Updated SQL Query

To implement this change, the query would look like this:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

Points to Consider

Verifying Fields: In the original query, there was a potential confusion regarding the variable insert_date. It's crucial to clarify whether you are filtering on the column insert_date from the CLIENT_SUB table or if you meant to reference current_date(). Make sure to double-check these conditions in your queries for accurate filtering.

Adding Indexes: For improved performance, consider creating an index on the combination of fields you're filtering. In this case, an index on client_subscriber_contract(client_id, insert_date) would help speed up the lookup process.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the transition from not in to not exists in Spark SQL not only addresses issues related to NULL values but also enhances the performance of your queries. By implementing this change and considering indexing strategies, you can manage your data more effectively. If you ever find your queries not yielding expected results, it might be time to reassess how you're filtering your datasets.

Feel free to share your experiences or further questions about SQL operations in the comments!