+1 (non-binding)
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:41 PM John Zhuge wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:06 PM Wenchen Fan wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding). I think this is more clear to both users and developers,
>> compared to the existing one which only supports append/overwrite and
>>
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:06 PM Wenchen Fan wrote:
> +1 (binding). I think this is more clear to both users and developers,
> compared to the existing one which only supports append/overwrite and
> doesn't work with tables in data source(like JDBC table) well.
>
> On Wed, Jul
+1 (binding). I think this is more clear to both users and developers,
compared to the existing one which only supports append/overwrite and
doesn't work with tables in data source(like JDBC table) well.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:06 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
> +1 (not binding)
>
> On Tue, Jul 17,
Thanks 0xF0F0F0 and Ashutosh for the pointers.
Holden,
I am trying to look into sparklingml...what am I looking for? Also which
chapter/page of your book should I look at?
Mohit.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 3:02 AM Holden Karau wrote:
> If you want to see some examples in a library shows a way to
+1 (not binding)
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 10:59 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> From discussion on the proposal doc and the discussion thread, I think we
> have consensus around the plan to standardize logical write operations for
> DataSourceV2. I would like to call a vote on the
I just called a vote on this. I don't think we really need a shepherd if
there's enough interest for a vote to pass.
rb
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:00 AM Cody Koeninger wrote:
> According to
>
> http://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
>
> the shepherd should be a PMC member, not
Hi everyone,
>From discussion on the proposal doc and the discussion thread, I think we
have consensus around the plan to standardize logical write operations for
DataSourceV2. I would like to call a vote on the proposal.
The proposal doc is here: SPIP: Standardize SQL logical plans
According to
http://spark.apache.org/improvement-proposals.html
the shepherd should be a PMC member, not necessarily the person who
proposed the SPIP
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Wenchen Fan wrote:
> I don't know an official answer, but conventionally people who propose the
> SPIP would
I don't know an official answer, but conventionally people who propose the
SPIP would call the vote and "shepherd" the project. Other people can jump
in during the development. I'm interested in the new API and like to work
on it after the vote passes.
Thanks,
Wenchen
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at
I was going through this and CVE-2018-1334 vulnerabilities
As per mitigation plan advised to upgrade to 2.2.2 and 2.3.1, but from the
release notes I don’t find any reference against these vulnerabilities.Can
some one please provide me the jira ID against which these issues are fixed.
Regards
+1 too
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018, 05:38 Hyukjin Kwon, wrote:
> +1
>
> 2018년 7월 17일 (화) 오전 7:34, Sean Owen 님이 작성:
>
>> Fix is committed to branches back through 2.2.x, where this test was
>> added.
>>
>> There is still some issue; I'm seeing that archive.apache.org is
>> rate-limiting downloads and
11 matches
Mail list logo
