Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17980
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17980
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81379/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17980
**[Test build #81379 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81379/testReport)**
for PR 17980 at commit
Github user maropu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19119
Jenkins, retest this please.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
Github user WeichenXu123 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18902
Sure. I will create JIRA after this perf gap is confirmed.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Github user maropu commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18931#discussion_r136776281
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/WholeStageCodegenExec.scala
---
@@ -149,14 +149,146 @@ trait CodegenSupport extends
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19121
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
GitHub user yaooqinn opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19121
[SPARK-21906][YARN][Spark Core]Don't runAsSparkUser to switch
UserGroupInformation in YARN mode
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
1ãThe Yarn applicationâs ugi is
Github user yaooqinn commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18983
cc @hvanhovell
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18875
**[Test build #81380 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81380/testReport)**
for PR 18875 at commit
Github user yaooqinn commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19068#discussion_r136766581
--- Diff:
sql/hive-thriftserver/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/hive/thriftserver/SparkSQLCLIDriver.scala
---
@@ -81,11 +81,7 @@ private[hive] object
Github user mpjlu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18748
LGTM
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
Github user jerryshao commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18628
@cloud-fan @jiangxb1987, what do you think about this PR, I think it mostly
copies from HS2, and it is quite isolated unless we enabled spnego, so it
should be safe to merge.
---
If your
Github user mpjlu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18624
Thanks @MLnick , I think the ML ALS suite is ok, just MLLIB ALS suite is
too simple. One possible enhancement is to add the same test cases as ML ALS
suite. How do you think about it?
---
If your
Github user MLnick commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18624
@mpjlu also feel free to look into enhancing the tests. One issue however
is we don't want to add to the run time too much as the ALS suite already is
very heavy on time.
---
If your project is
Github user MLnick commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18624
@mpjlu sorry for delay on this. I think the idea of the change is good but
I still need to review in detail. One concern I have is it now looks quite
convoluted, so I want to see if we can simplify
Github user MLnick commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18748
Any further comments on this? @srowen @mpjlu @jkbradley?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user MLnick commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18902
Seems fine to me to use the DF version even though it's slower. But we
should open a JIRA issue to track where the gap is on the SQL side of things
and try to improve the performance.
---
If your
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17980
**[Test build #81379 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81379/testReport)**
for PR 17980 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19116
**[Test build #81378 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81378/testReport)**
for PR 19116 at commit
Github user ghandzhipeng closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19120
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19116
retest this please
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19120
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18865
Just to summarise my opinion:
I think I am unclear if we should call, selecting `_corrupt_record` alone,
a bug to disallow. If I understood correctly, I think we are basically saying:
GitHub user ghandzhipeng opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19120
Ghandzhipeng
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
(Please fill in changes proposed in this fix)
## How was this patch tested?
(Please explain how this
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19086
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81374/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19116
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81371/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81376/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19117
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81375/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19086
**[Test build #81374 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81374/testReport)**
for PR 19086 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19117
**[Test build #81375 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81375/testReport)**
for PR 19117 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19116
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19119
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81377/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19117
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19086
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19116
**[Test build #81371 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81371/testReport)**
for PR 19116 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19119
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19119
**[Test build #81377 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81377/testReport)**
for PR 19119 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
**[Test build #81376 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81376/testReport)**
for PR 17014 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19119
**[Test build #81377 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81377/testReport)**
for PR 19119 at commit
GitHub user gatorsmile opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19119
[SPARK-21845] [SQL] Make codegen fallback of expressions configurable
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
We should make codegen fallback of expressions configurable. So far,
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19112#discussion_r136752724
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/streaming/progress.scala ---
@@ -200,7 +202,7 @@ class SourceProgress protected[sql](
*/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19118
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user gatorsmile commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18975
@tejasapatil So far, we disallow overwriting a path that is also being read
from. Atomicity is not guaranteed even if we use the staging directory.
Atomicity still cannot be achieved if we use
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
**[Test build #81376 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81376/testReport)**
for PR 17014 at commit
GitHub user awarrior opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19118
[SPARK-21882][CORE] OutputMetrics doesn't count written bytes correctly in
the saveAsHadoopDataset function
spark-21882
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Github user jaceklaskowski commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19112#discussion_r136750244
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/streaming/progress.scala ---
@@ -200,7 +202,7 @@ class SourceProgress protected[sql](
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19117
**[Test build #81375 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81375/testReport)**
for PR 19117 at commit
Github user gatorsmile commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19117
@cloud-fan @sameeragarwal
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and
GitHub user gatorsmile opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19117
[SPARK-21904] [SQL] Rename tempTables to tempViews in SessionCatalog
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
`tempTables` is not right. To be consistent, we need to rename the
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
**[Test build #81373 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81373/testReport)**
for PR 17014 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81373/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user awarrior commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19115
ok, thx
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
Github user awarrior closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19115
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/19086
**[Test build #81374 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81374/testReport)**
for PR 19086 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17014
**[Test build #81373 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/81373/testReport)**
for PR 17014 at commit
101 - 158 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
