Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1445#issuecomment-49202151
QA tests have started for PR 1445. This patch merges cleanly. brView
progress:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/16738/consoleFull
---
Github user rxin closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1431
---
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 rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1431#issuecomment-49202256
SGTM.
---
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/1444
---
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 rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1444#issuecomment-49202444
I'v merged this in master branch-1.0.
---
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
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1430#issuecomment-49202491
Merging in master branch-1.0.
---
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
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1405#issuecomment-49202648
Looks good to me -- we can put it in both 1.0.2 and 0.9.2 as well.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1430
---
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 kayousterhout commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49202752
Also cc @mateiz
---
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 kayousterhout commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#discussion_r15016112
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSetManager.scala ---
@@ -353,6 +350,14 @@ private[spark] class TaskSetManager(
Github user srowen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1393#issuecomment-49203419
@mateiz I think it would mean mostly cloning `ALS.scala`, as the `Rating`
object is woven throughout. Probably some large chunks could be refactored and
shared. Is that
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1430#issuecomment-49203889
Actually only master. There is a conflict in branch-1.0 that I will leave
it intact for now.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1435#issuecomment-49203999
Merging in 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
Github user aarondav commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1409#issuecomment-49204042
Jenkins, 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 project does not have
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1435
---
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 pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1409#issuecomment-49204801
QA tests have started for PR 1409. This patch merges cleanly. brView
progress:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/16740/consoleFull
---
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1432#issuecomment-49204855
Merging in master and branch-1.0. 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
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1432
---
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 rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1428#issuecomment-49205341
It doesn't bring much benefit right now, but what we are doing here is
creating patterns in NullPropagation to specify the semantics of each
individual expression ... not
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/855#issuecomment-49205391
QA results for PR 855:br- This patch PASSES unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/991#issuecomment-49205438
QA tests have started for PR 991. This patch merges cleanly. brView
progress:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/16741/consoleFull
---
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49205621
I'm curious about one thing here: doesn't this change mean that we might
wait longer before launching a no-prefs or speculative task, due to delay
scheduling? This is
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49205693
Looks like Kay pointed out the same issue while I was typing this.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1436#issuecomment-49205734
Unit test actually 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 project does not have
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/929#issuecomment-49206560
QA results for PR 929:br- This patch PASSES unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1444#issuecomment-49206483
QA results for PR 1444:br- This patch PASSES unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49206624
By the way, as far as I can tell, findSpeculativeTask also takes a locality
level as an argument, and doesn't return tasks that are farther away than that.
Do we need to
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1437#issuecomment-49206767
Merging in 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
Github user dorx commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15017783
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49206975
BTW even in that case we could solve it by having more levels, basically
pass in a different level to request speculative tasks after we requested
non-speculative ones,
Github user mridulm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49207097
My rationale for suggesting noPrefs tasks after NODE_LOCAL was to ensure
that noPref tasks do not preempt locality for NODE_LOCAL tasks (they cant for
PROCESS_LOCAL)
Github user dorx commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15017975
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user mateiz commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1362#discussion_r15018046
--- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/DAGScheduler.scala
---
@@ -1107,7 +1106,6 @@ class DAGScheduler(
case shufDep:
Github user concretevitamin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1440#discussion_r15018072
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/columnar/ColumnStats.scala ---
@@ -344,21 +344,52 @@ private[sql] class StringColumnStats
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/153#issuecomment-49207773
Merging this in 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
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/153#issuecomment-49207755
I think I've seeen this happening once in a while, but can't exactly
reproduce after clean. Anyway it's better to explicitly define the return
type for public methods, even
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1362#issuecomment-49208638
This looks good to me modulo a few comments! One other thing though, you
should add a unit test for this functionality. Create a test that would result
in a very long
Github user andrewor14 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1259#issuecomment-49208726
LGTM
---
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 tsudukim commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1384#issuecomment-49207731
@pwendell I agree that there are many room for improvement about handling
of stageId and attemptId. It might be better to break this problems into some
sub-tasks. I
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/153
---
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 tsudukim commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1384#discussion_r15019018
--- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/util/JsonProtocol.scala ---
@@ -478,6 +479,7 @@ private[spark] object JsonProtocol {
def
Github user tsudukim commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1384#issuecomment-49209319
@rxin OK. After that, I think I can make this patch better.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1384#issuecomment-49208410
Let's hold off merging this one until we merge #1262. Then it will be
easier to index the information based on stage + attempt.
---
If your project is set up for it, you
Github user rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1259#issuecomment-49209789
Thanks. Merging this. We can fix the serialization error logging in a
separate PR.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user tsudukim commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1384#issuecomment-49209857
@rxin in #1262, can I expect the key of the stagedata in
JobProgressListener become stageId + attemptId instead of stageId only?
---
If your project is set up for it,
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1259
---
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 concretevitamin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#discussion_r15019589
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/logical/LogicalPlan.scala
---
@@ -26,6 +26,28 @@ import
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15019606
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/Correlation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15019630
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/PearsonCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15019612
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/Correlation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15019642
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15019620
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/Correlation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1428#issuecomment-49210382
I'm not sure I agree with that. This is a pretty niche optimization not
something fundamental about the expressions that is required for correct
evaluation (and the
Github user concretevitamin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#issuecomment-49210466
Jenkins, test this please.
I think I have addressed the latest round of review comments, where the
biggest changes being:
- Remove statistics
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49210568
Ah, I see, so you're saying it's worth to wait 3 seconds for node-local
ones to be able to go instead of launching no-prefs tasks. That does make
sense. We just have to
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15019889
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1393#issuecomment-49210917
BTW this could also be a place to use the dreaded Scala @specialized
annotation to template the code for Ints vs Longs, though as far as I know
that's being deprecated by
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1393#issuecomment-49210831
Yeah, that's what I meant, we can clone it at first but we might be able to
share code later (at least the math code we run on each block, or stuff like
that). But let's
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1256#issuecomment-49211180
QA results for PR 1256:br- This patch PASSES unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds the following public classes
(experimental):brclass
Github user marmbrus commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#discussion_r15020066
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/logical/LogicalPlan.scala
---
@@ -26,6 +26,28 @@ import
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1022#issuecomment-49211292
QA results for PR 1022:br- This patch PASSES unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15020198
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the
Github user pwendell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1212#issuecomment-49211502
Hey @mridulm I usually won't merge any code in the scheduler unless
@markhamstra or @kayhousterhout has looked at it and signed off, since they are
the most active
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1428#issuecomment-49211681
That is exactly the argument I made when the folding logic was added. :) I
suggested that we add `deterministic` instead and then have a rule that folds
things that are
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1428#issuecomment-49211732
I would be supportive of changing it to match my original proposal...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15020402
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the
Github user dorx commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15020400
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user mengxr commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15020475
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/SpearmansCorrelation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1022#issuecomment-49213268
QA results for PR 1022:br- This patch PASSES unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user marmbrus commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1440#discussion_r15020827
--- Diff:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/columnar/ColumnStats.scala ---
@@ -344,21 +344,52 @@ private[sql] class StringColumnStats extends
Github user mridulm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1212#issuecomment-49214821
Thanks, but that is fine, I merged it in after I resolved my local hardware
issues today.
So did not need to impose on you to merge after all !
On 17-Jul-2014
Github user mridulm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49215361
I am not sure if it is ok to wait ... This is something I never considered
from the beginning when I added process_local ... Maybe it is ok !
If it is not, then we
Github user dorx commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1367#discussion_r15022756
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/mllib/stat/correlation/Correlation.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software
Github user tdas commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1372#issuecomment-49217835
There has been further comments regarding this. It would be great if you
address them as well.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1409#issuecomment-49218047
QA results for PR 1409:br- This patch PASSES unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/991#issuecomment-49218315
QA results for PR 991:br- This patch FAILED unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds the following public classes
(experimental):brtrait Lifecycle
Github user pwendell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1212#issuecomment-49218616
@mridulm what I meant was that it would be good in the future if you try to
have Mark or Kay look at patches in the scheduler code before you merge them.
---
If your
Github user concretevitamin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#issuecomment-49219047
Jenkins, 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 project does
Github user jkbradley commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/886#issuecomment-49219179
@manishamde It looks like the MIMA issue may not be fixed right away, so
let's use the exceptions in MimaExcludes.scala for now. Could you please do
that? I believe
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#issuecomment-49219540
QA tests have started for PR 1238. This patch merges cleanly. brView
progress:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/16743/consoleFull
---
Github user concretevitamin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#discussion_r15024063
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/plans/logical/LogicalPlan.scala
---
@@ -26,6 +26,28 @@ import
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#issuecomment-49219898
QA results for PR 1238:br- This patch FAILED unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1188#issuecomment-49220170
QA tests have started for PR 1188. This patch merges cleanly. brView
progress:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/16744/consoleFull
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1188#issuecomment-49220283
QA results for PR 1188:br- This patch FAILED unit tests.br- This patch
merges cleanlybr- This patch adds no public classesbrbrFor more
information see test
Github user mateiz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49220362
Ah, that's true, it won't be as common now. Anyway I'd be okay with any
solution as long as TaskSets with only no-prefs tasks, or only process-local +
no-prefs, don't get
Github user andrewor14 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1336#discussion_r15024426
--- Diff:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/deploy/master/ui/HistoryNotFoundPage.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user nevillelyh commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1188#issuecomment-49220820
Sorry missed one. Fixed the style warning.
---
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 dbtsai commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1425#issuecomment-49221370
@mengxr Scalatest 2.x has the tolerance feature, but it's absolute error
not relative error. For large numbers, the absolute error may not be
meaningful. With `===`, it
Github user mridulm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49221715
Same here, Kay any thoughts ?
On 17-Jul-2014 1:44 am, Matei Zaharia notificati...@github.com wrote:
Ah, that's true, it won't be as common now. Anyway I'd be
Github user mengxr commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1425#issuecomment-49221957
`almostEquals` reads better than `~===`. The feature we like is having the
values in comparison in the error message but not the name :)
---
If your project is set up
Github user concretevitamin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#issuecomment-49222667
Jenkins, 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 project does
Github user dbtsai commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1425#issuecomment-49222983
I learn `almostEquals` from boost library. Anyway, in this case, how do we
distinguish the one with throwing out the message, and the one just returning
true/false?
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1238#issuecomment-49223292
QA tests have started for PR 1238. This patch merges cleanly. brView
progress:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/16745/consoleFull
---
Github user srowen closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1393
---
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 24601 opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1446
Added t2 instance types
New t2 instance types require HVM amis, bailout assumption of pvm
causes failures when using t2 instance types.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1446#issuecomment-49225163
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
Github user pwendell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1409#issuecomment-49227548
Okay I'm going to merge this into master and 1.0. We can cut a new patch
release shortly for this.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
GitHub user sryza opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1447
SPARK-2519 part 2. Remove pattern matching on Tuple2 in critical section...
...s of CoGroupedRDD and PairRDDFunctions
This also removes an unnecessary tuple creation in cogroup.
You can
Github user pwendell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1446#discussion_r15027927
--- Diff: ec2/spark_ec2.py ---
@@ -240,7 +240,10 @@ def get_spark_ami(opts):
r3.xlarge: hvm,
r3.2xlarge: hvm,
Github user CodingCat commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/1313#issuecomment-49227891
en...that makes sense
actually we can get the situation about locality in the taskSet easily
through myLocalityLevels, which is calculated when a new
101 - 200 of 318 matches
Mail list logo
