Github user Ngone51 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21096
Thank you for your comments @markhamstra .
Yeah, I'm considering adding a UT to support this change. And thank for
reminding me of DAGScheduler's basic principle.
---
Github user markhamstra commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21096
As is, this PR isn't acceptable on multiple levels. Even if I were
convinced (which I am not presently) that the sequence of
`getShuffleDependencies` calls covered in this PR is the only one
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21096
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
