[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-22616?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16268530#comment-16268530 ]
Andreas Maier commented on SPARK-22616: --------------------------------------- Ok, I understand your point now. You were thinking in terms of bytecode compatibility and I was just thinking in terms of source code compatibility. > df.cache() / df.persist() should have an option blocking like df.unpersist() > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: SPARK-22616 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-22616 > Project: Spark > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: PySpark, Spark Core > Affects Versions: 2.2.0 > Reporter: Andreas Maier > Priority: Minor > > The method dataframe.unpersist() has an option blocking, which allows for > eager unpersisting of a dataframe. On the other side the method > dataframe.cache() and dataframe.persist() don't have a comparable option. A > (undocumented) workaround for this is to call dataframe.count() directly > after cache() or persist(). But for API consistency and convenience it would > make sense to give cache() and persist() also the option blocking. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org