Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/20082#discussion_r159033482
--- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/TaskContext.scala ---
@@ -150,6 +150,13 @@ abstract class TaskContext extends Serializable {
*/
def stageId(): Int
+ /**
+ * An ID that is unique to the stage attempt that this task belongs to.
It represents how many
+ * times the stage has been attempted. The first stage attempt will be
assigned stageAttemptId = 0
+ * , and subsequent attempts will increasing stageAttemptId one by one.
+ */
+ def stageAttemptId(): Int
--- End diff --
My concern is that, internally we use `stageAttemptId`, and internally we
call `TaskContext.taskAttemptId` `taskId`. However, for end users, they don't
know the internal code, and they are more familiar with `TaskContext`. I think
the naming should be consistent with the public API `TaskContext`, instead of
internal code.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
