Github user piffall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14345
Maybe I'm wrong, I need to check that this performance increasement is not
related with linear search prabability of matching filyer on my tests.
I'll analize and post some results.
---
Github user KevinGrealish commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13824
Was on vacation. Looking again today.
---
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 have this
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14314
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14314
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62825/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14314
**[Test build #62825 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62825/consoleFull)**
for PR 14314 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14257
**[Test build #62829 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62829/consoleFull)**
for PR 14257 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12374
**[Test build #62830 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62830/consoleFull)**
for PR 12374 at commit
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14257
Now, the PR is updated with new golden SQL files.
---
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 have
Github user jayunit100 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14347
Fixes https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14347
---
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 have
Github user sethah commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12374#discussion_r72108678
--- Diff:
mllib/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/ml/tree/impl/RandomForestSuite.scala ---
@@ -137,14 +137,47 @@ class RandomForestSuite extends SparkFunSuite
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14347
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
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 have this
Github user piffall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14345
The result is the same. cartesian is an expensive operation, and normal
cartesian produces all product. The performance on cartesianFilter is almost 2x
faster than cartesian, and then filter,
GitHub user jayunit100 opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14347
Update Ivy artifacts statement for dev/audit
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Updating the readme regarding ivy artifacts for dev/audit
## How was this patch
Github user piffall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14345
But it's true that does not respect the defined pipeline. :(
---
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 dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14257
I removed the new format stuff. I'll update this PR, soon.
---
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
Github user sethah commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12374#discussion_r72107064
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/ml/tree/impl/RandomForest.scala ---
@@ -692,14 +692,20 @@ private[spark] object RandomForest extends Logging
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307
**[Test build #62828 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62828/consoleFull)**
for PR 14307 at commit
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307
Hi, @rxin .
The PR is updated to use `checkSQL`.
---
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 yhuai commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14297#discussion_r72104591
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/command/views.scala ---
@@ -44,7 +50,11 @@ import
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13886
**[Test build #62827 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62827/consoleFull)**
for PR 13886 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13758
**[Test build #62826 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62826/consoleFull)**
for PR 13758 at commit
Github user rxin commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14345
Does the existing cartesian filter require materializing all the output? If
not, is there a difference between this API and just applying a filter on the
normal cartesian method?
---
If your
Github user rxin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14344#discussion_r72100760
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/objects/objects.scala
---
@@ -501,6 +501,143 @@ case class MapObjects private(
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14257
It's just for helping review processes.
---
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 have this
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14257
No problem. We can simply remove `object SQLBuilder` and modify two lines.
May I remove those?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14334
---
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 have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307#discussion_r72099637
--- Diff:
sql/hive/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/LogicalPlanToSQLSuite.scala
---
@@ -927,6 +927,14 @@ class LogicalPlanToSQLSuite
Github user rxin commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14257
I'm less sure about the new format -- it leads to tons of whitespaces for
very long SQL queries.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user rxin commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14334
Merging in master/2.0.
---
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 have this feature
enabled and wishes
Github user rxin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307#discussion_r72099113
--- Diff:
sql/hive/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/LogicalPlanToSQLSuite.scala
---
@@ -927,6 +927,14 @@ class LogicalPlanToSQLSuite extends
Github user markhamstra commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14332
The Scala API docs clearly specify that the most idiomatic usage of Option
is to treat it as a collection or monad and use map, flatMap, filter, or
foreach. Those docs also clearly specify
Github user databricks-jenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/36
**[Test build #61 has
started](https://jenkins.test.databricks.com/job/spark-pull-request-builder/61/consoleFull)**
for PR 36 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14314
**[Test build #62825 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62825/consoleFull)**
for PR 14314 at commit
Github user databricks-jenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/36
**[Test build #61 has
finished](https://jenkins.test.databricks.com/job/spark-pull-request-builder/61/consoleFull)**
for PR 36 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14340
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62822/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14340
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14340
**[Test build #62822 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62822/consoleFull)**
for PR 14340 at commit
Github user yhuai commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14284#discussion_r72083334
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/WindowExec.scala ---
@@ -625,10 +643,12 @@ private[execution] final class
Github user yhuai commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14284#discussion_r72083182
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/SQLWindowFunctionSuite.scala
---
@@ -357,14 +356,59 @@ class SQLWindowFunctionSuite extends
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14327
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14327
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62823/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14327
**[Test build #62823 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62823/consoleFull)**
for PR 14327 at commit
Github user liancheng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13704#discussion_r72080255
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -1441,6 +1441,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughJoin
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14339
---
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 have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user liancheng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13704#discussion_r72077898
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -1441,6 +1441,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughJoin
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307
Hi, @hvanhovell .
Could you merge this PR? :)
---
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 have
Github user lianhuiwang commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14111
@cloud-fan I don't think it is a bug of constraints propagation because
filter with the uncorrelated scalar subquery needs to push down due to it can
filter many records.
In addition,
Github user liancheng commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14339
LGTM, merging to master and branch-2.0. Thanks!
---
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 have this
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14304
---
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 have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user liancheng commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14304
I'm merging this to master. Thanks for fixing this!
---
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 have
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14346
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14346
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62824/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14346
**[Test build #62824 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62824/consoleFull)**
for PR 14346 at commit
Github user liancheng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14302#discussion_r72071947
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/command/tables.scala ---
@@ -520,7 +522,7 @@ case class DescribeTableCommand(table:
Github user liancheng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14302#discussion_r72070878
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/command/tables.scala ---
@@ -436,11 +436,13 @@ case class DescribeTableCommand(table:
Github user viirya commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14296#discussion_r72070208
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1207,6 +1207,17 @@ class Analyzer(
Github user liancheng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14302#discussion_r72069708
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/command/tables.scala ---
@@ -520,7 +522,7 @@ case class DescribeTableCommand(table:
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14331
---
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 have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14297
---
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 have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user liancheng commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14331
Merging to master, thanks!
---
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 have this feature
enabled and
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14346
**[Test build #62824 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62824/consoleFull)**
for PR 14346 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14331
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 project does not have this feature
Github user liancheng commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14297
Merging to master, thanks!
---
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 have this feature
enabled and
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14331
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62821/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14331
**[Test build #62821 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62821/consoleFull)**
for PR 14331 at commit
GitHub user yanboliang opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14346
[SPARK-16710] [SparkR] [ML] spark.glm should support weightCol
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Training GLMs on weighted dataset is very important use cases. Users can
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14327
**[Test build #62823 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62823/consoleFull)**
for PR 14327 at commit
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12822#discussion_r72061720
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/subquery.scala
---
@@ -44,6 +44,15 @@ abstract class SubqueryExpression
Github user koeninger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14343
Agreed that only removing the word experimental should be necessary. I
thought there were more mentions, but can double check.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user cloud-fan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14111
@lianhuiwang, after taking a look at this example, I think this is a very
special case: 2 physical plans reference to one same subquery(same instance).
However, I don't think this is a valid
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14340
**[Test build #62822 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62822/consoleFull)**
for PR 14340 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13738
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62819/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13738
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13738
**[Test build #62819 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62819/consoleFull)**
for PR 13738 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14297
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62818/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14297
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14297
**[Test build #62818 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62818/consoleFull)**
for PR 14297 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14279
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14279
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62817/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14279
**[Test build #62817 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62817/consoleFull)**
for PR 14279 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62820/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307
**[Test build #62820 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62820/consoleFull)**
for PR 14307 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14345
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
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 have this
GitHub user piffall opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14345
Added new high-order function RDD::cartesianFilter(other)(f).
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Add a new high-order function to RDD to make cartesian filter pairs in one
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14132#discussion_r72052381
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1774,6 +1775,49 @@ class Analyzer(
}
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14132#discussion_r7205
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/analysis/Analyzer.scala
---
@@ -1774,6 +1775,49 @@ class Analyzer(
}
Github user cloud-fan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14313
thanks, merging to master!
---
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 have this feature
enabled and
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14313
---
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 have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14331
**[Test build #62821 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62821/consoleFull)**
for PR 14331 at commit
Github user liancheng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14331#discussion_r72047779
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/catalog/interface.scala
---
@@ -173,8 +190,18 @@ case class CatalogTable(
Github user liancheng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14344#discussion_r72045939
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/objects/objects.scala
---
@@ -501,6 +501,143 @@ case class MapObjects
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14279
**[Test build #62817 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62817/consoleFull)**
for PR 14279 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14307
**[Test build #62820 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62820/consoleFull)**
for PR 14307 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13738
**[Test build #62819 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62819/consoleFull)**
for PR 13738 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14297
**[Test build #62818 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62818/consoleFull)**
for PR 14297 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14344
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14344
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62816/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14344
**[Test build #62816 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/62816/consoleFull)**
for PR 14344 at commit
Github user hvanhovell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/14306#discussion_r72042273
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/logical/LocalRelation.scala
---
@@ -73,6 +73,6 @@ case class
401 - 500 of 699 matches
Mail list logo
