Skip to content

[SPARK-56606][SQL] Bump embedded SRS registry to PROJ 9.8.1#55525

Open
szehon-ho wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
szehon-ho:upgrade-proj-9.8.1
Open

[SPARK-56606][SQL] Bump embedded SRS registry to PROJ 9.8.1#55525
szehon-ho wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
szehon-ho:upgrade-proj-9.8.1

Conversation

@szehon-ho
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

This PR bumps Spark's embedded spatial reference system registry (srs_registry.csv) to match OSGeo PROJ 9.8.1 by updating dev/generate_srs_registry.py and re-running the generator. It also adds regression tests for SRIDs that appear in the PROJ 9.8.1 registry but were absent in the prior registry: projected ESRI:102964, ESRI:105604, and geographic ESRI:104030, plus updated counts in SpatialReferenceSystemMapperSuite and additional round-trip SRIDs in GeometryDataFrameSuite.

Why are the changes needed?

Keeping the bundled registry aligned with current PROJ releases ensures newly standardized CRS codes resolve correctly for Geometry / Geography types and connector interoperability. Tests lock in representative new entries so future registry refreshes do not silently drop CRS coverage.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

Yes. Users may see additional supported SRIDs / CRS string IDs and updated canonical mappings consistent with PROJ 9.8.1 data (the CSV diff is the source of truth).

How was this patch tested?

  • build/sbt 'sql/testOnly org.apache.spark.sql.internal.types.SpatialReferenceSystemMapperSuite'
  • build/sbt 'sql/testOnly org.apache.spark.sql.GeometryDataFrameSuite -- -z "round-trip with Geometry SRIDs"'

Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

No.

Regenerate srs_registry.csv from OSGeo PROJ 9.8.1 via dev/generate_srs_registry.py.

Add regression coverage for new registry SRIDs in SpatialReferenceSystemMapperSuite
and extend GeometryDataFrame round-trip SRIDs.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mkaravel mkaravel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants