[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-9487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15680080#comment-15680080
]
Saikat Kanjilal edited comment on SPARK-9487 at 11/19/16 11:59 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok guess I spoke too soon :), onto the next set of challenges, jenkins build
report is here:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/68897/
I ran each of these tests individually as well as together as a suite locally
and they all passed, any ideas on how to address these?
was (Author: kanjilal):
Ok guess I spoke too soon :), onto the next set of challenges, jenkins build
report is here:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/68897/
I ran each of these tests individually as well as together as a suite and they
all passed, any ideas on how to address these?
> Use the same num. worker threads in Scala/Python unit tests
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-9487
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-9487
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: PySpark, Spark Core, SQL, Tests
> Affects Versions: 1.5.0
> Reporter: Xiangrui Meng
> Labels: starter
> Attachments: ContextCleanerSuiteResults, HeartbeatReceiverSuiteResults
>
>
> In Python we use `local[4]` for unit tests, while in Scala/Java we use
> `local[2]` and `local` for some unit tests in SQL, MLLib, and other
> components. If the operation depends on partition IDs, e.g., random number
> generator, this will lead to different result in Python and Scala/Java. It
> would be nice to use the same number in all unit tests.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org
