On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Kay Ousterhout <k...@eecs.berkeley.edu> wrote: > I don't think the blacklisting is a priority and the CPUS_PER_TASK issue > was still broken after this patch (so broken that I'm convinced no one > actually uses this feature!!), so agree with TD's sentiment that this > shouldn't go into 0.9.1.
I am not sure I follow what exactly was broken. Note that there is no change of behavior by the PR on CPUS_PER_TASK : that exists in 0.6 (probably earlier). Is the behavior of CPUS_PER_TASK broken ? Yes - but that is not an artifact of this PR. Regards, Mridul > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Tathagata Das <tathagata.das1...@gmail.com >> wrote: > >> PR 159 seems like a fairly big patch to me. And quite recent, so its impact >> on the scheduling is not clear. It may also depend on other changes that >> may have gotten into the DAGScheduler but not pulled into branch 0.9. I am >> not sure it is a good idea to pull that in. We can pull those changes later >> for 0.9.2 if required. >> >> TD >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Mridul Muralidharan <mri...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> > Forgot to mention this in the earlier request for PR's. >> > If there is another RC being cut, please add >> > https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/159 to it too (if not done >> > already !). >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Mridul >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Tathagata Das >> > <tathagata.das1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > Hello everyone, >> > > >> > > Since the release of Spark 0.9, we have received a number of important >> > bug >> > > fixes and we would like to make a bug-fix release of Spark 0.9.1. We >> are >> > > going to cut a release candidate soon and we would love it if people >> test >> > > it out. We have backported several bug fixes into the 0.9 and updated >> > JIRA >> > > accordingly< >> > >> https://spark-project.atlassian.net/browse/SPARK-1275?jql=project%20in%20(SPARK%2C%20BLINKDB%2C%20MLI%2C%20MLLIB%2C%20SHARK%2C%20STREAMING%2C%20GRAPH%2C%20TACHYON)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.9.1%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed) >> > >. >> > > Please let me know if there are fixes that were not backported but you >> > > would like to see them in 0.9.1. >> > > >> > > Thanks! >> > > >> > > TD >> > >>
