Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153117330
Hi @kayousterhout , are you ok with my explanation above? I'd like to get
this is soon.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153117844
Merged build started.
---
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153119411
**[Test build #44819 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44819/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153117825
Merged build triggered.
---
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 kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r43670488
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -468,11 +468,18 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153134683
Scheduler changes LGTM, with the documentation improvements I suggested
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153138287
**[Test build #44828 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44828/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153137357
Merged build started.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153137327
Merged build triggered.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153152212
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153152206
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
Github user kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r43670630
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -482,7 +489,10 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153151863
**[Test build #44819 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44819/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153166216
Merged build triggered.
---
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 vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153165888
hmm, weird failure. retest this please
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153170036
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153170034
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153164574
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153164573
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
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
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153172694
really jenkins, help me out here. retest this please
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153164500
**[Test build #44828 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44828/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153173976
Merged build started.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153166264
Merged build started.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153173958
Merged build triggered.
---
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153176554
**[Test build #44841 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44841/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153201756
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153201753
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
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-153201676
**[Test build #44841 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44841/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-152790319
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-152790196
**[Test build #44744 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44744/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-152790318
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-152784361
Merged build started.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-152784357
Merged build triggered.
---
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-152785029
**[Test build #44744 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44744/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150992179
Merged build triggered.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150992191
Merged build started.
---
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 kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42952922
--- Diff:
core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImplSuite.scala ---
@@ -237,4 +237,39 @@ class TaskSchedulerImplSuite extends
Github user kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42952925
--- Diff:
core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImplSuite.scala ---
@@ -237,4 +237,39 @@ class TaskSchedulerImplSuite extends
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150992356
So, my code was slightly different, and that caused the problem with my
unit test; but I still think my change is more correct. Not only it avoids
unnecessary error logs
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150991709
Huh, there's more code in my approach because with just the code you had,
the unit test I added failed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-151006183
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
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-151006134
**[Test build #44323 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44323/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-151006185
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150991951
What was the problem?
---
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 kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150991608
I still prefer the approach in the commit I submitted, because it puts all
of the code to handle the pending loss reasons in one place in
TaskSchedulerImpl
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150993653
**[Test build #44323 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44323/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150657909
So, any remaining feedback?
---
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 pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150072395
Merged build started.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150072364
Merged build triggered.
---
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150075686
**[Test build #44117 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44117/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150099051
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150099052
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-150098979
**[Test build #44117 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/44117/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42439726
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -482,21 +482,28 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149377970
The coraseGrainedSchedulerBackend changes are fine; I meant the changes to
TaskSchedulerImpl / TaskSetManager. What do you mean that my change immediately
marks
Github user kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42438520
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -482,21 +482,28 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149376270
The scheduler changes still seem more complicated than what I proposed. Why
not do this the simpler way?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149379158
Derp yeah that !(==) was weird! The recomputeLocality() call seems like it
will matter very rarely, so I think in the name of simplicity we should skip it.
---
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149380248
I had to remove the unit test because that test cannot call
`TaskSchedulerImpl.executorLost`, which is the only place that's changing now...
---
If your project is set
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149373071
Merged build triggered.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149373092
Merged build started.
---
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 vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149378632
True; I think the weird `!( == )` comparison tricked me. But your change
also doesn't call `recomputeLocality()` for the first `executorLost` call,
which could make a
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149381675
> proposing adding a test to TaskSchedulerImplSuite
I did, but last time I looked at that test suite I didn't have good luck in
figuring out how to add a useful
Github user vanzin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42440043
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -482,21 +482,28 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
}
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149380561
Merged build triggered.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149380583
Merged build started.
---
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 kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149380773
Did you see my comment proposing adding a test to TaskSchedulerImplSuite?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42441070
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/cluster/CoarseGrainedSchedulerBackend.scala
---
@@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ class
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149381337
**[Test build #43955 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/43955/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149397569
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149397539
**[Test build #43955 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/43955/consoleFull)**
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-149397568
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
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
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148865840
(BTW that's what the unit test I added was meant to test.)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148865650
> So what do those calls do?
My understanding is that you may have pending tasks waiting to be run on
that executor (because of PROCESS_LOCAL locality?
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148863767
I think the dag scheduler still gets updated right away. You're right that
some tasks might be stuck in the TaskSetManager -- I interpreted your goal as
being
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148865197
Sorry, you're right, in your cxode the dag scheduler is updated right away.
Only the task set manager is not.
The delay is hopefully not that long. As part of
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148867465
Just submitted https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9154 because I think
those calls are unnecessary...but let's wait for Mark to weigh in there to make
sure.
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148862564
@kayousterhout but that's not equivalent to my change, is it? My change is
more proactive in updating the scheduler's state to reflect that the executor
doesn't exist
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148857831
@vanzin I was thinking of something much simpler, like this:
https://github.com/kayousterhout/spark-1/commit/da26fa02d57ca12f7e50105930ca46c390aa3098
(with this
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148864516
Actually I'm confused: with your change, when the ExecutorLost message is
received, you call "addPendingTask" again for any still-pending tasks for that
executor
Github user vanzin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42266241
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/ExecutorLossReason.scala ---
@@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ private[spark] object ExecutorExited {
}
}
Github user kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148588048
@andrewor14 I think @vanzin was waiting on me to give the thumb's up for
the original approach (not the current diff) but I haven't had a chance to look
at this
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42198446
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/ExecutorLossReason.scala ---
@@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ private[spark] object ExecutorExited {
}
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42199327
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/cluster/CoarseGrainedSchedulerBackend.scala
---
@@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ class
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148552709
[Test build #43810 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/43810/console)
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148552806
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148552808
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42196645
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -362,8 +361,8 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42198351
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -459,46 +458,64 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42198578
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSetManager.scala ---
@@ -795,31 +795,40 @@ private[spark] class TaskSetManager(
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42199201
--- Diff:
core/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSetManagerSuite.scala ---
@@ -776,6 +776,30 @@ class TaskSetManagerSuite extends
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42199262
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/cluster/CoarseGrainedSchedulerBackend.scala
---
@@ -249,6 +258,30 @@ class
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42196018
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -325,16 +325,15 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#discussion_r42195991
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala ---
@@ -362,8 +395,8 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148526821
[Test build #43810 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/43810/consoleFull)
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148525757
Merged build triggered.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-148525781
Merged build started.
---
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-147908559
[Test build #43697 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/43697/consoleFull)
for PR 8887 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-147907985
Merged build triggered.
---
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 vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8887#issuecomment-147907083
retest this please
---
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
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
