SparkQA removed a comment on pull request #28781:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28781#issuecomment-643862941
**[Test build #124023 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/124023/testReport)**
for PR 28781 at commit
MaxGekk commented on pull request #28829:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28829#issuecomment-643930188
@cloud-fan Please, review the PR
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the
SparkQA commented on pull request #28781:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28781#issuecomment-643929926
**[Test build #124023 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/124023/testReport)**
for PR 28781 at commit
dongjoon-hyun edited a comment on pull request #28830:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28830#issuecomment-643929047
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on
dongjoon-hyun commented on pull request #28830:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28830#issuecomment-643929047
The last commit is to trying to preserve the previous behavior (whatever it
was) since Apache Spark 2.2.0 although there is no guarantee which it safe or
not. We will
HyukjinKwon commented on pull request #28830:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28830#issuecomment-643927909
I am okay to revert it for now but I couldn't fully follow why we expect an
explicit order from a set. Has it been ever guaranteed somewhere? Using
`distinct`, we can
AmplabJenkins removed a comment on pull request #28784:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28784#issuecomment-643926776
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on
AmplabJenkins commented on pull request #28784:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28784#issuecomment-643926776
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to
SparkQA commented on pull request #28784:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28784#issuecomment-643926432
**[Test build #124035 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/124035/testReport)**
for PR 28784 at commit
dilipbiswal commented on pull request #28032:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28032#issuecomment-643926524
@wangyum Thanks for your response. If the incoming data is not even
distributed by the repartitioning key, wouldn't this strategy create issues
when there is skew in the
yaooqinn commented on pull request #28784:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28784#issuecomment-643926043
retest this please
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please
yaooqinn commented on pull request #28784:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28784#issuecomment-643925671
Thanks @HyukjinKwon and @juliuszsompolski, I was waiting for
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28797 to be merged and then ping you guys.
Now it's been done.
The
dongjoon-hyun commented on a change in pull request #28828:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28828#discussion_r439949163
##
File path: sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/streaming/progress.scala
##
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ class StateOperatorProgress private[sql](
dongjoon-hyun commented on a change in pull request #28828:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28828#discussion_r439949163
##
File path: sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/streaming/progress.scala
##
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ class StateOperatorProgress private[sql](
cloud-fan commented on pull request #28797:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28797#issuecomment-643923811
thanks, merging to master/3.0!
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the
cloud-fan closed pull request #28797:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28797
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
MaxGekk commented on pull request #28809:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28809#issuecomment-643922594
I am going to skip the test checks if JDK tzdb is outdated and
Asia/Hong_Kong doesn't have timestamps overlapping in 1945 at all.
MaxGekk commented on pull request #28809:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28809#issuecomment-643920058
> It might be Amplap Jenkins host issue (Java version or environment).
It uses JDK w/ outdated time zone database (not clear from log which
version):
```
701 - 718 of 718 matches
Mail list logo