Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220256852
Thank you so much, @cloud-fan !
---
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 do
Github user cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220254151
thanks, merging to master and 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 doe
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719
---
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 ena
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220233909
@cloud-fan .
Now, it's ready again.
Could you merge this PR.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220225586
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 projec
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220225588
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220225490
**[Test build #58837 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58837/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`0cb1136`](https://g
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220217482
Oh, amazing. According to the last Jenkins results. The seven test failures
in `catalyst` are all of them.
```
[info] *** 7 TESTS FAILED ***
[error] Fa
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220217398
**[Test build #58837 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58837/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`0cb1136`](https://gi
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220217295
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220217294
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220217222
**[Test build #58834 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58834/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`d8257ee`](https://g
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220217246
I removed the last test commit.
---
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 do
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220216995
Thank you for understanding. I'll try to handle those test issues in
another PR.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220216050
I'm fine to leave the `resolved` checking in this PR, because the test
issue is kind of unrelated. But it will be good if we can send another PR to
fix the test issue
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220213423
Hmm. @cloud-fan . What about just using `resolved` checking simply? IMHO,
it provides just robustness. And, in fact, I'm reluctant to change testsuite
when adding
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220212842
For the second suggestion, `the optimizer is not tested but skipped`, you
mean skipping `FoldablePropagation` optimizer?
---
If your project is set up for it, yo
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220212554
Oops. Analyzing by modifying `checkEvaluation` is not helpful in this case.
For example, `CastSuite`,
```
{
val ret = cast(array_notNull, Arr
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220211380
Okay, I will proceed with modifying `checkEvaluation`. Thank you for fast
decision, @cloud-fan .
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this emai
Github user cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220211147
Ok, so there are a lot of places in our tests that use unresolved
expression to test optimizer. I think we should analyze the expression first in
`checkEvaluation`, o
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220210913
Should I touch those too? I agree with you that this situation will not
occur in **real** testcases.
Maybe, only `catalyst`-related problems?
---
If your pro
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220210664
@cloud-fan . Here is the result of `catalyst` first.
- **catalyst**: 7 failures
- DateExpressionsSuite: 3 failures
- CastSuite: 4 failures
---
If
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220208917
**[Test build #58834 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58834/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`d8257ee`](https://gi
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220208494
Here is another test run (without resolved checking and the test case
`checkEvaluation(FormatNumber(Literal.create(null, NullType), Literal(3)),
null)`.
---
If
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220207983
May I rollback the last commit? Let's see the Jenkins result. I think It's
worth of doing that.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220207782
Actually, I made two separate Jenkins run to show you the comparison. Those
fails on MiMa errors.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this ema
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220207591
No, there are more test suite failures. That is just one example.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220202352
If this is the only case, I prefer to remove this line:
`checkEvaluation(FormatNumber(Literal.create(null, NullType), Literal(3)),
null)`
In real world, a
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220134254
In addition, sorry for that I wrote a wrong example before
`checkEvaluation(FormatNumber(Literal(4.asInstanceOf[Byte]), Literal(3)),
"4.000")`.
---
If your pro
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220128276
Hi, @cloud-fan . I found the root cause. There is an exceptional case for
**Literal.create(null, NullType)**.
```scala
scala> import org.apache.spark.sql.t
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-220100881
Sure! I'll investigate more. Let you know.
---
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 cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219986401
I'm ok to keep the `resolved` checking, if we can figure out why the test
failed and there is no easy workaround. Can you dig into it to see what
happened? Basically
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219895673
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219895669
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219895536
**[Test build #58726 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58726/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`3206bd0`](https://g
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219882335
**[Test build #58726 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58726/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`3206bd0`](https://gi
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219881850
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219866626
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219866605
**[Test build #58722 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58722/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`3206bd0`](https://g
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219866627
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219864486
**[Test build #58722 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58722/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`3206bd0`](https://gi
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219864350
Rebased to resolve conflicts.
---
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 dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219782448
Ya. I was really flustrated, too. When you read the body of
`checkEvaluationWithOptimization` function above, it has the following lines.
It adds `Alias`.
```
Github user cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219708181
Why is that `Alias` not analyzed? Isn't
`FormatNumber(Literal(4.asInstanceOf[Byte]), Literal(3))` a resolved expression?
---
If your project is set up for it, you ca
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219700590
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219700589
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219700387
**[Test build #58687 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58687/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`d69f521`](https://g
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219688169
At this time, MiMa test passed. Let's wait and see the result.
By the way, please note that I only replaced `transformAllExpressions` in
this final commit.
-
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219684101
**[Test build #58687 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58687/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`d69f521`](https://gi
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219683646
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
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219683326
Hmm. @cloud-fan .
Unfortunately, for `resolved`, we can not pass the tests without that.
For example, `StringExpressionsSuite.format_number` has the fo
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219682736
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219682710
**[Test build #58686 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58686/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`d69f521`](https://g
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219682734
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 projec
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219682307
Oh, I think MiMa failure is irrelevant to 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.
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219681775
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219681748
**[Test build #58685 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58685/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`97afe31`](https://g
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219681780
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219681064
**[Test build #58686 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58686/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`d69f521`](https://gi
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219680042
**[Test build #58685 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58685/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`97afe31`](https://gi
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219670004
Thank YOU, @cloud-fan . I fix them 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 p
Github user cloud-fan commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219668576
Mostly LGTM except some minor comments, thanks for working on it!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitH
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r63491459
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -659,6 +660,45 @@ object NullPropagation extends Rule
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r63491368
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -659,6 +660,45 @@ object NullPropagation extends Rule
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219502838
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 projec
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219502841
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219502550
**[Test build #58650 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58650/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`631cea6`](https://g
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-219479060
**[Test build #58650 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58650/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`631cea6`](https://gi
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218959631
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218959627
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218959501
**[Test build #58540 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58540/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`2d56bc2`](https://g
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218950690
**[Test build #58540 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58540/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`2d56bc2`](https://gi
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218950477
Rebase to resolve conflicts.
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218922635
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218922631
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218922499
**[Test build #58518 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58518/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`61f26f2`](https://g
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218909190
**[Test build #58518 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58518/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`61f26f2`](https://gi
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218856347
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218856345
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218856024
**[Test build #58508 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58508/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`18e9e05`](https://g
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218833125
**[Test build #58508 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58508/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`18e9e05`](https://gi
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r63063384
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -618,6 +619,48 @@ object NullPropagation extends
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r63060729
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/FoldablePropagationSuite.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+/*
+ * Lic
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r63060451
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -618,6 +619,48 @@ object NullPropagation extends
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218825375
Hi, @cloud-fan .
For `AggregateOptimizeSuite.scala`, we need to use `caseSensitiveAnalysis`.
Especially, `test("remove repetition in grouping expression")`.
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r62957143
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -618,6 +619,48 @@ object NullPropagation extends Rule
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r62956465
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -618,6 +619,48 @@ object NullPropagation extends Rule
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r62956411
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/FoldablePropagationSuite.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+/*
+ * License
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r62956372
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/AggregateOptimizeSuite.scala
---
@@ -34,29 +34,34 @@ class AggregateOptimize
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r62956390
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/EliminateSortsSuite.scala
---
@@ -69,4 +70,16 @@ class EliminateSortsSuite e
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#discussion_r62956339
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/AggregateOptimizeSuite.scala
---
@@ -34,29 +34,34 @@ class AggregateOptimize
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218560535
Hi, @cloud-fan . Now, it passed again.
For the remaining comments, I can do that but the reason is not clear to me.
> I prefer to handle one Project each ro
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218550436
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218550435
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 projec
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218550113
**[Test build #58385 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58385/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`f379a09`](https://g
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218525102
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218526294
**[Test build #58385 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58385/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`f379a09`](https://gi
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218525058
**[Test build #58382 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/58382/consoleFull)**
for PR 12719 at commit
[`7ca8b2a`](https://g
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218525099
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 projec
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12719#issuecomment-218518949
There was build break on master branched. I made a hotfix for that. After
merging that, I'll retry this.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to t
1 - 100 of 230 matches
Mail list logo
