Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461
---
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 mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49401094
Merged this, 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 sryza commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49401593
It looks like there was actually a compile error here that I missed last
night. Uploading the fix.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user sryza commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49402486
Fix: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1479
---
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 aarondav commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49405145
This PR also changed the behavior with respect to mutating CoGroups -- now
we mutate combiner1 in place rather than returning a new ArrayBuffer. This is
_probably_ not
Github user sryza commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49406581
I actually did consider this, I should have made a note in the PR. Agreed
that we should be careful with the implications of these small changes.
---
If your project is
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49496955
Oops, sorry about that, the Jenkins messages look too similar now :)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
GitHub user sryza opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461
SPARK-2553. CoGroupedRDD unnecessarily allocates a Tuple2 per dependency...
... per key
My humble opinion is that avoiding allocations in this performance-critical
section is worth the extra
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49385926
Jenkins, add to whitelist and test 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
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49386002
Looks good to me, though this isn't avoiding *that* much since you are
appending to an ArrayBuffer anyway. But no reason not to do it.
---
If your project is set up for
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49386013
QA tests have started for PR 1461. This patch merges cleanly. brView
progress:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/16800/consoleFull
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1461#issuecomment-49386170
QA results for PR 1461:br- This patch FAILED unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
12 matches
Mail list logo
