Github user mateiz commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#discussion_r10420059
--- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/SparkContext.scala ---
@@ -830,13 +830,10 @@ class SparkContext(
setLocalProperty(externalCallSite,
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37156227
Actually I do have one other comment, maybe we should call this
getCreationSite / creationSite so as not to confuse it with the call site of a
job. This is really the
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37156376
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
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37220219
Looks good, though I guess it has a compile error
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37243260
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37243262
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/13100/
---
If your project
Github user pwendell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37247451
Okay merging this now. Thanks Matei and Aaron for the feedback.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106
---
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
Github user aarondav commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#discussion_r10414915
--- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/api/java/JavaRDD.scala ---
@@ -135,7 +135,11 @@ class JavaRDD[T](val rdd: RDD[T])(implicit val
classTag:
Github user aarondav commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37133978
Just had a couple questions essentially related to our deprecation policy.
Change looks good to me otherwise. Thanks for the cleanup!
---
If your project is set up for
Github user pwendell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#discussion_r10414992
--- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/api/java/JavaRDD.scala ---
@@ -135,7 +135,11 @@ class JavaRDD[T](val rdd: RDD[T])(implicit val
classTag:
Github user pwendell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37136132
As per our offline discussion let's either just remove the existing
function calls (which is okay since this is a 1.0 release) or continue to
support them with
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37147113
I'd say just remove them -- this is a pretty small feature and easy to work
around if anyone used it.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user pwendell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#discussion_r10417424
--- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/rdd/RDD.scala ---
@@ -1031,8 +1026,10 @@ abstract class RDD[T: ClassTag](
private var
Github user pwendell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37154596
@mateiz @aarondav This update simply removes the `generator` setters and
changes the naming as per Matei's suggestion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37154609
Merged build started.
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37154608
Merged build triggered.
---
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
GitHub user pwendell opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106
SPARK-1205: Clean up callSite/origin/generator.
This patch removes the `generator` field and simplifies + documents
the tracking of callsites.
There are two places where we care about
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37111998
Merged build started.
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37113363
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/106#issuecomment-37113364
All automated tests passed.
Refer to this link for build results:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/13077/
---
If your project
21 matches
Mail list logo
