-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/58865/#review173689
-----------------------------------------------------------




ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/spark/SparkTask.java
Lines 132 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/58865/#comment246728>

    I think the log is unnecessary because the failure should already be logged 
in the monitor



ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/spark/SparkTask.java
Lines 135 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/58865/#comment246729>

    Same as above. Can we consolidate the logs a bit?



ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/spark/status/RemoteSparkJobMonitor.java
Lines 104 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/58865/#comment246731>

    Maybe I was being misleading. I mean we can compute the total task only 
once when the job first reaches RUNNING state, i.e. in the "if (!running)". At 
this point, the total count is determined and won't change.


- Rui Li


On May 2, 2017, 6:49 p.m., Xuefu Zhang wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/58865/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 2, 2017, 6:49 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for hive.
> 
> 
> Bugs: HIVE-16552
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-16552
> 
> 
> Repository: hive-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See JIRA description
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   common/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/conf/HiveConf.java 84398c6 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/spark/SparkTask.java 32a7730 
>   
> ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/spark/status/RemoteSparkJobMonitor.java
>  dd73f3e 
>   
> ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/spark/status/SparkJobMonitor.java 
> 0b224f2 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/58865/diff/3/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Test locally
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Xuefu Zhang
> 
>

Reply via email to