GitHub user ngbinh reopened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26
[SPARK-1146] Vagrant support for Spark
This PR uses Vagrant to create a clusters of three VMs, one master and two
workers. It allows running/testing Spark Cluster mode on one machine.
My ini
Github user ngbinh closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enable
Github user ngbinh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36275658
Thanks for reminding me.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this f
Github user hsaputra commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36275259
Hi @ngbinh, do you mind tagging the PR with "[WIP]" prefix to help indicate
you are still working on this?
Thx!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can rep
Github user ngbinh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36226895
One of the main reason I work on this PR is I found many times working on
Spark local mode doesn't expose problems when deployed on a cluster. This PR
should allow Spark dev
Github user ngbinh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36226574
I can argue that having ec2, stand alone cluster scripts inside the core
repo is important for Spark adoption.
@markhamstra I agree. My feeling is the benefit is st
Github user markhamstra commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36226183
Yes, they definitely have value, but putting them directly into Spark also
has costs and imposes responsibilities on the maintainers. The question is how
to get the be
Github user ngbinh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36226015
I agree that while they are not necessary be a part of Spark core because
there is usually no direct dependencies between them. But I feel like they make
Spark more accessib
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36225852
FWIW I agree. The tendency is almost always to include a bunch of modules
that are really separate, slightly-downstream projects. You could make similar
arguments for even m
Github user jyotiska commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36225645
+1 It will be better if these projects were made separate from core-spark
project and grown as independent projects. This keeps the core project lean and
helps to grow the
Github user markhamstra commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36224757
I'm bothered by the idea of vagrant, docker, ec2, and potentially other
virtualization and cloud environments (EMR, etc.) all becoming supported and
maintained parts of
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36222794
Merged build finished.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have t
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26#issuecomment-36222795
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/12911/
---
If your project i
13 matches
Mail list logo
