Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-199748937
**[Test build #53765 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/53765/consoleFull)**
for PR 11809 at commit
Github user viirya commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56965468
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/ConstraintPropagationSuite.scala
---
@@ -217,4 +218,12 @@ class
Github user viirya commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56963992
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/ConstraintPropagationSuite.scala
---
@@ -217,4 +218,12 @@ class
Github user viirya commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-199567291
@marmbrus Great suggestion. Thanks! I will update this according to your
suggestion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-199443463
Yeah, also agree with @marmbrus .
This is a general issue. When fixing `isNotNull` Constraints, we also have
to fix the related reasoning parts for using
Github user sameeragarwal commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-199415725
+1 completely agree with @marmbrus
---
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 gatorsmile commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56871749
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/planning/patterns.scala
---
@@ -202,3 +202,25 @@ object Unions {
}
}
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-199413031
This fix seems okay, but I feel like we are just adding one-offs instead of
taking a step back and thinking about how to generally infer null-intollerance
from an
Github user sameeragarwal commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-199405696
Thanks for fixing this! Just few non-critical suggestions.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user sameeragarwal commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56868093
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/ConstraintPropagationSuite.scala
---
@@ -217,4 +218,12 @@ class
Github user marmbrus commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56867942
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/planning/patterns.scala
---
@@ -202,3 +202,25 @@ object Unions {
}
}
Github user marmbrus commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56867675
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/planning/patterns.scala
---
@@ -202,3 +202,25 @@ object Unions {
}
}
Github user sameeragarwal commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56867727
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/QueryPlan.scala
---
@@ -36,6 +37,13 @@ abstract class QueryPlan[PlanType <:
Github user sameeragarwal commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56867331
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/planning/patterns.scala
---
@@ -202,3 +202,25 @@ object Unions {
}
Github user sameeragarwal commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#discussion_r56867111
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/planning/patterns.scala
---
@@ -202,3 +202,25 @@ object Unions {
}
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-198178288
**[Test build #53495 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/53495/consoleFull)**
for PR 11809 at commit
GitHub user viirya opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809
[SPARK-13995][SQL] Constraints should take care of Cast
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-13995
We infer
Github user viirya commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-198192953
@gatorsmile Thanks for providing the info! I found this issue before when
dealing with another PR. But I has no time to submit it separately as new PR
until today.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-198209937
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
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-198183659
Yeah, I also hit this issue when fixing this PR:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11765
You are so fast! Actually, they are related. My original plan is
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-198209846
**[Test build #53495 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/53495/consoleFull)**
for PR 11809 at commit
Github user viirya commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-198653079
cc @marmbrus @sameeragarwal
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/11809#issuecomment-198209939
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
23 matches
Mail list logo
