Github user dilipbiswal commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Thank you very much @srowen @fjh100456
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Merged to master
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
Github user dilipbiswal commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
@fjh100456 Yeah.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
Github user fjh100456 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
I think random tests are not a good solution. If the use case does run too
slowly, it may be much better to reduce codecs. We have done unit tests on the
codec priority in
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
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/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97117/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97117 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97117/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
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/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97117 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97117/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
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/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97088/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97088 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97088/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97088 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97088/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
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/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97083/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97083 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97083/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97083 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97083/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97071/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97071 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97071/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #97071 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/97071/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user dilipbiswal commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
@srowen @gatorsmile
Let me see if we can target a low hanging fruit first :-). Given the same
input set is used for table and session codecs, we can skip when they both are
same value .
Github user dilipbiswal commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
@srowen
> I would vote against running tests that we think have any value randomly.
It's just the wrong way to solve problems, as much as it would be to simply run
90% of our test suites
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
I would vote against running tests that we think have any value randomly.
It's just the wrong way to solve problems, as much as it would be to simply run
90% of our test suites each time on the
Github user dilipbiswal commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
@srowen Thank you for your comments. Actually from a cursory look, i would
agree that it does not look that pretty. I also agree that it does look like we
are not testing as much as we used to.
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
-1 We definitely can't just randomly test a subset of cases we need to test
in order to make things faster. Worse, it makes the failure nondeterministic.
However, if there's a good argument
Github user dilipbiswal commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
@mgaido91
Thanks for your input.
I took another look at the testcase. Let me outline some of my
understandings first.
- The test validates the precedence rules in
Github user mgaido91 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
@dilipbiswal you're perfectly right. The point is: let's assume we
introduce a bug which causes returning always SNAPPY. Your test will pass about
2/3 times out of 6. So it is quite likely that
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/96991/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
**[Test build #96991 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/96991/testReport)**
for PR 22641 at commit
Github user dilipbiswal commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
@mgaido91 Trying to understand the concern regarding "working combination
and a non-working " comment. In my understanding, originally we were doing a
cross join between two sets of codecs. so
Github user mgaido91 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
I am not sure about this @dilipbiswal. Taking only one element is a bit too
risky as there may be a working combination and a non-working one and here you
don't know which one you are picking. I
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/22641
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/22641
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
42 matches
Mail list logo
