Thanks for the explanation. Regards Asif
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 10:00 AM Herman van Hovell <her...@databricks.com> wrote: > There are many factors: > > - Typically it is a race between multiple PRs, where they all pass CI > without the other changes, and get merged at the same time. > - Differences between (the nightly job and the PR job) environments > (e.g. size of the machine) can also cause these issues. > - In the case of my PR there were some classpath subtleties > (apparently the testing classpath is not fully hermetic), which PR testing > did not uncover. > - ... > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 1:53 PM Asif Shahid <asif.sha...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I am genuinely curious to know, as to how do those commits which are >> reliably failing the build, end up in master ? Is there some window of race >> where two conflicting PRs in terms of logic ,tend to mess up the final >> state in master ? >> I have seen in past few months, while synching up my open PRs, fail due >> to issues in master. >> I suppose many times, env. issues etc can cause. But scala unit tests >> failing on master should not be common. >> >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:37 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.h...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Did you see the PR, Martin? SBT is also broken like the following and >>> we've been waiting for actions over two days on the original PR. >>> >>> $ build/sbt clean "catalyst/testOnly >>> org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.encoders.EncoderResolutionSuite" >>> ... >>> [info] *** 1 SUITE ABORTED *** >>> [error] Error during tests: >>> [error] org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.encoders.EncoderResolutionSuite >>> [error] (catalyst / Test / testOnly) sbt.TestsFailedException: Tests >>> unsuccessful >>> [error] Total time: 66 s (01:06), completed Jan 27, 2025, 9:52:35 AM >>> >>> For the record, we keep it in the `master` branch still. >>> >>> Dongjoon. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:33 PM Martin Grund >>> <mar...@databricks.com.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> Would it not have been mindful to wait for the original author to >>>> investigate the PR and do a forward fix instead of reverting such a big >>>> change? Since this was only blocking the Maven test we could have waited >>>> probably a few more days without any issues. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:32 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongj...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> This is reverted from branch-4.0 via the following. >>>>> >>>>> - https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/49696 >>>>> Revert "[SPARK-49700][CONNECT][SQL] Unified Scala Interface for >>>>> Connect and Classic" >>>>> >>>>> Dongjoon. >>>>> >>>>> On 2025/01/26 16:58:45 Dongjoon Hyun wrote: >>>>> > Thank you! >>>>> > >>>>> > Dongjoon >>>>> > >>>>> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 20:01 Yang Jie <yangji...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > > I reported a test issue that is suspected to be related to this pr： >>>>> > > >>>>> > > - https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/48818/files#r1929652392 >>>>> > > >>>>> > > and it seems to be causing the failure of the Maven daily test. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Thanks, >>>>> > > Jie Yang >>>>> > > >>>>> > > On 2025/01/24 20:24:57 Dongjoon Hyun wrote: >>>>> > > > Hi, All. >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > SPARK-49700 landed one hour ago. >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > Since this is another huge package redesign across 399 files in >>>>> Spark >>>>> > > 4.0, >>>>> > > > please check if you are not affected accidentally. >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > Best Regards, >>>>> > > > Dongjoon. >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> > > To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >>>>> >>>>>
