Thanks Szehon for the update. These two Auto CDC PRs look good to me.

Anton and Andreas, could you share the current status of the DSv2
transaction fixes for SPARK-56695 and SPARK-56995, and when you expect them
to be merged and backported to branch-4.2?

Once these pending items are in, I can proceed with cutting RC1.

Thanks,
Huaxin

On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 4:56 PM Szehon Ho <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Huaxin
>
> Thanks for all the hard work doing the release!
>
> It'd be nice to get these two PR by Anish in for the Spark 4.2 feature
> Auto CDC (although its not the end of the world if we cannot).
>
>    - https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/53073
>    - https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/56160
>
> The first one is day 0 bug for SDP and the second is a validation that'd
> be awkward to add after the release.
>
> We will aim to get it in by EOD, but depend on CI.
>
> Thanks!
> Szehon
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 7:37 PM Cheng Pan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I apologize for any inconvenience caused.
>>
>> My intention was to keep PR open for at least 1-2 workdays (based on the
>> size and complexity of the patch, also don't want to keep it open too long
>> to block the release process) so that developers from all time zones would
>> have the opportunity to review it, but I was completely unaware that Monday
>> is a holiday in the US. The merge operation happened on Tue 11:48 AM PDT,
>> after a formal approval from a PMC member active in the SQL area; half of
>> the workday is indeed too short for reviewers based in the US to review.
>>
>> Apologize again, and I'm happy to address any post-review comments.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Cheng Pan
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 27, 2026, at 09:15, huaxin gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Cheng,
>>
>> Thanks for working on this fix.
>>
>> Since this has already been merged into branch-4.2, I will trust your
>> judgment on the fix itself, but I do have some concerns about the process.
>>
>> The PR was opened over the weekend, Monday was a US holiday, and the
>> 12-hour notice was sent at 10:59 PM Monday night Pacific time. In practice,
>> that did not leave enough review time before merging into the release
>> branch. This is especially concerning for a last-minute change close to RC
>> that includes an API change and behavior changes beyond the narrow
>> correctness issue.
>>
>> For future 4.2.0 release-branch changes, could we please allow more
>> practical review time?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Huaxin
>>
>> On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 10:59 PM Cheng Pan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Huaxin, thank you for replying.
>>>
>>> I would not treat it as a hard blocker given it has been existing for a
>>> long time the impact scope is fairly narrow, but still good to get the fix
>>> include the 4.2.0 given the fix is a relatively small change.
>>>
>>> > The PR also includes API changes and new TABLESAMPLE SYSTEM support ...
>>> > … unless you think the correctness fix needs to be split out
>>> separately.
>>>
>>> 3 parts mentioned in the PR description can be split into dedicated PRs,
>>> but the correctness fix for (1) requires the API change; the change for (2)
>>> (3) are small, I put them together mainly for demonstration of why the API
>>> change makes sense. I’m fine to split the PR and defer the "new TABLESAMPLE
>>> SYSTEM support” to 4.3 if you think it’s risky.
>>>
>>> The PR has been reviewed and approved by cloud-fan, I will leave it open
>>> for another 12 hours and merge it as is if no further comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Cheng Pan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 26, 2026, at 00:53, huaxin gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Cheng,
>>>
>>> Thanks for flagging this. The withReplacement = true pushdown issue
>>> looks valid, but the impact seems fairly narrow. It mainly affects users
>>> doing JDBC TABLESAMPLE pushdown with withReplacement = true on PostgreSQL
>>> or Databricks. The PR also includes API changes and new TABLESAMPLE SYSTEM
>>> support, which feels more like a 4.2.1 candidate than a last-minute RC
>>> change.
>>>
>>> Could you evaluate the risk of merging at the last minute? Otherwise I'd
>>> prefer 4.2.1, unless you think the correctness fix needs to be split out
>>> separately.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Huaxin
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 3:27 AM Cheng Pan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Huaxin,
>>>>
>>>> I found some issues in the implementation of JDBC connector TABLESAMPLE
>>>> pushdown, I opened SPARK-57040 and
>>>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/56092, it would be great if you
>>>> could take a look and evaluate whether this is a blocker and should be
>>>> included in 4.2.0 since you are the author of this feature.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Cheng Pan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 18, 2026, at 11:40, huaxin gao <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I plan to cut Spark 4.2.0 RC1 on May 20, assuming there are no
>>>> outstanding release blockers.
>>>>
>>>> If you have any fixes that must be included in 4.2.0, please make sure
>>>> they are merged/backported to branch-4.2 before then. If you are aware
>>>> of any release blockers, please reply with the JIRA/PR and current status.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Huaxin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Reply via email to