Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
**[Test build #77157 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77157/testReport)**
for PR 18052 at commit
[`72bd097`](https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/72
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
**[Test build #77157 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77157/testReport)**
for PR 18052 at commit
[`72bd097`](https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/7
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77157/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
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
e
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
**[Test build #77161 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77161/testReport)**
for PR 18052 at commit
[`06116d1`](https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/06
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
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
e
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
**[Test build #77161 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77161/testReport)**
for PR 18052 at commit
[`06116d1`](https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/0
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77161/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
**[Test build #77180 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77180/testReport)**
for PR 18052 at commit
[`ff55e2d`](https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/ff
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
**[Test build #77180 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77180/testReport)**
for PR 18052 at commit
[`ff55e2d`](https://github.com/apache/spark/commit/f
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
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
e
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/77180/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user zero323 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
__Note__: [Waiting for some
feedback](https://twitter.com/holdenkarau/status/866672579318337537).
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on Git
Github user holdenk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Lets see what @davies has to say.
---
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 a
Github user davies commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
It seems that it's also easy to implement these outside of PySpark by user
themselves or third-party libraries, right? If that's the case, I'd like not to
add it into PySpark.
---
If your project i
Github user zero323 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
@davies It is. Monkey patching context, `RDD` and some classes not covered
by Scala `AsyncRDDFunctions`, [takes around 100
LOCs](https://github.com/zero323/pyspark-asyncactions) (excluding tests,
c
Github user holdenk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
I think the kind of users wanting to use async actions are also the same
kind of users who would be writing multi-threaded Spark applications.
That being said @davies is there a reason you d
Github user davies commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Personally, I think less is more, don't add everything into every software,
otherwise every software can write email eventually.
The RDD API is kind of frozen, we don't add more APIs into it
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
I subscribed this PR as actually I am the user who implemented the similar
one in user side weirdly. But one thing I can tell is, it was buggy and hard to
debugg / test in particular when the wo
Github user holdenk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Sure, I think that the Python specific implementation is probably something
we don't want to pick up as a maintenance burden - but exposing the current
Java API seems reasonable -- especially if we
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Yea, I would then go +1 if this can simply done by exposing the existing
APIs. For my production case, I need this at least. This would not be something
to be suggested to be closed for no inter
Github user zero323 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Personally I would prefer not including this at all, than using JVM
implementation with callbacks:
- Py4J gateway is already pretty slow, and can be unstable under high load.
Putting higher
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
Hm.. for the former, isn't that the problem existing already for other APIs
if Py4J itself is problematic? For the latter, if this is not that simple, I
would rathet avoid adding this API for n
Github user zero323 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18052
IMHO it is, but this feature is hardly essential. Arguably we wouldn't need
Scala API in the first place, if the built-in `Future` supported canceling.
It is possible I am overthinking the l
24 matches
Mail list logo
