Github user akashrn5 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
> Does this PR fix two problems?
> If it is yes, better to separate it into two.
>
the one line change of rowId to rowId + 1 is coupled with this, when i
removed the compress
Github user manishgupta88 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
@kumarvishal09 ...I agree with you that it is a functional issue and we
need to merge it. My point was before merging we can do one load performance
test to see if there is any
Github user akashrn5 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
@kumarvishal09 i have tested the fallback scenario by changing code, it is
even failing with that also and i have raised discussion in snappy community
also
Github user kumarvishal09 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
@manishgupta88 @xuchuanyin I think if it's really a problem with snappy
then whether any performance impact is there or not we have to merge as its a
functional issue. :)
@akashrn5
Github user manishgupta88 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
@akashrn5 .I agree with @xuchuanyin before merging the PR it is
better to get the PR tested for performance. We can observe 2 things during the
benchmark test - performance and
Github user xuchuanyin commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Does this PR fix two problems?
If it is yes, better to separate it into two. And for the first problem,
I'm also concerning about the performance decrease. The rawCompress can save
some
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.1.0, Please check CI
http://136.243.101.176:8080/job/ApacheCarbonPRBuilder2.1/2220/
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.3.2, Please check CI
http://136.243.101.176:8080/job/carbondataprbuilder2.3/10477/
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.2.1, Please check CI
http://95.216.28.178:8080/job/ApacheCarbonPRBuilder1/2440/
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.1.0, Please check CI
http://136.243.101.176:8080/job/ApacheCarbonPRBuilder2.1/2218/
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.3.2, Please check CI
http://136.243.101.176:8080/job/carbondataprbuilder2.3/10472/
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.2.1, Please check CI
http://95.216.28.178:8080/job/ApacheCarbonPRBuilder1/2436/
---
Github user akashrn5 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
> i think the performance of rawCompress is better than
compressLong,compressInt, can we find the root cause of JVM crashï¼
i dont think there is much difference we get with timing,
Github user qiuchenjian commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
i think the performance of rawCompress is better than
compressLong,compressInt, can we find the root cause of JVM crashï¼
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.3.2, Please check CI
http://136.243.101.176:8080/job/carbondataprbuilder2.3/10455/
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.2.1, Please check CI
http://95.216.28.178:8080/job/ApacheCarbonPRBuilder1/2415/
---
Github user CarbonDataQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/carbondata/pull/3053
Build Success with Spark 2.1.0, Please check CI
http://136.243.101.176:8080/job/ApacheCarbonPRBuilder2.1/2198/
---
17 matches
Mail list logo
