[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-15 Thread JIRA
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495908#comment-14495908 ] Micael Capitão commented on SPARK-6800: --- In the example I've provided, there will be

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-15 Thread Liang-Chi Hsieh (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495921#comment-14495921 ] Liang-Chi Hsieh commented on SPARK-6800: The ranges for partitions 1 to 8 are not

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-15 Thread JIRA
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495926#comment-14495926 ] Micael Capitão commented on SPARK-6800: --- My fault. I'm sorry. I have looked to the

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-15 Thread Liang-Chi Hsieh (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495928#comment-14495928 ] Liang-Chi Hsieh commented on SPARK-6800: About the upper and lower bounds issue,

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-15 Thread Liang-Chi Hsieh (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495945#comment-14495945 ] Liang-Chi Hsieh commented on SPARK-6800: PR:

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-15 Thread JIRA
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495940#comment-14495940 ] Micael Capitão commented on SPARK-6800: --- Could you please point me to that page? I'm

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-14 Thread Liang-Chi Hsieh (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495570#comment-14495570 ] Liang-Chi Hsieh commented on SPARK-6800: And according to the explanation from

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-14 Thread Liang-Chi Hsieh (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14495564#comment-14495564 ] Liang-Chi Hsieh commented on SPARK-6800: Why the other ones will result in

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-13 Thread Apache Spark (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14492244#comment-14492244 ] Apache Spark commented on SPARK-6800: - User 'viirya' has created a pull request for

[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-6800) Reading from JDBC with SQLContext, using lower/upper bounds and numPartitions gives incorrect results.

2015-04-13 Thread JIRA
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6800?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14492364#comment-14492364 ] Micael Capitão commented on SPARK-6800: --- The above pull request seem to only fix the