Github user holdenk commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9581#issuecomment-161080982
ping @jkbradley
---
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 pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161083435
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 JoshRosen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161085945
I think that there's a way to configure Maven enforcer such that the build
will break if a project uses code from a dependency that it doesn't declare. I
might look
Github user JoshRosen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10055#issuecomment-161086126
AFAIK it currently doesn't need to retry any queries, since the current set
of heuristics for determining when / whether to reset() seems to be working
well.
---
Github user apivovarov commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9975#issuecomment-161088458
we need to merge it to branch-1.5 because branch-1.5 has the latest and
updated ec2 script
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10074#issuecomment-161094233
**[Test build #46987 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46987/consoleFull)**
for PR 10074 at commit
Github user JoshRosen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10055#issuecomment-161095742
Update: it looks like only one query needed to be retried:
```
13:03:52.601 WARN
org.apache.spark.sql.hive.execution.HiveCompatibilitySuite: Test failed
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073#issuecomment-161095996
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/9756#issuecomment-161095638
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user yhuai commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9988#issuecomment-161099860
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 this
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10070#issuecomment-161100037
**[Test build #46976 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46976/consoleFull)**
for PR 10070 at commit
GitHub user davies opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10075
[SPARK-10277] [SQL] change the default plan for single distinct
Use try to match the behavior for single distinct aggregation with Spark
1.5, but that's not scalable, we should be robust by
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10070#issuecomment-161102407
**[Test build #46993 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46993/consoleFull)**
for PR 10070 at commit
Github user nongli commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073#discussion_r46343262
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/planning/patterns.scala
---
@@ -133,6 +132,38 @@ object ExtractEquiJoinKeys extends
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10055#issuecomment-161079922
I like this idea. How many queries to we have to retry? Should we cache
that?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user JoshRosen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10055#issuecomment-161089426
I've created a JIRA for this and have updated the PR title and description;
PTAL.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10043#issuecomment-161090828
**[Test build #46982 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46982/consoleFull)**
for PR 10043 at commit
Github user holdenk commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9207#issuecomment-161092974
So I've updated this against master @jkbradley
---
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 yhuai commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10068#issuecomment-161093097
Thanks! Merging to master and branch 1.6.
---
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9524#issuecomment-161096854
**[Test build #46983 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46983/consoleFull)**
for PR 9524 at commit
Github user tnachen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10057#issuecomment-161112433
I think actually just using spark.deploy.* seems like a better choice, as
in any case we don't really expect users to have different zookeepers deployed
and cluster
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/6935#issuecomment-161114716
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/6935#issuecomment-161114713
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10043#issuecomment-161115368
**[Test build #47003 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/47003/consoleFull)**
for PR 10043 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9988#issuecomment-161115253
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/10071#issuecomment-161082187
**[Test build #46978 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46978/consoleFull)**
for PR 10071 at commit
Github user holdenk commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9313#issuecomment-161084997
@sryza Any additional thoughts? Should we try pinging some people in the
core group?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user apivovarov commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10064#issuecomment-161088619
We need to merge recent fixes from master to this branch
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9975
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user felixcheung commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9613#issuecomment-161088966
should we simply gsup to replace the substring `data.frame` from `str()`
output? It looks like we are already `head()/take()/collect()` a small part of
the
Github user JoshRosen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161092480
Actually, we might be able to get away with completely removing our
dependency on the Scala compiler. It looks like the usage which broke the build
is only used in
Github user zsxwing commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10017#issuecomment-161092795
@jerryshao LGTM except one minor issue in tests. Because we want to merge
this fix today for 1.6, I just submitted #10074 to fix the issue in tests.
---
If your
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10068
---
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 AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10075#issuecomment-16697
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-16754
It does still work and I use it regularly. What is the motivation?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10075#issuecomment-16695
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9819#issuecomment-161113175
**[Test build #47001 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/47001/consoleFull)**
for PR 9819 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161083428
**[Test build #46978 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46978/consoleFull)**
for PR 10071 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161083437
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user vanzin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9182#discussion_r46336258
--- Diff:
yarn/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/cluster/ExtensionServiceIntegrationSuite.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the
Github user vanzin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9182#issuecomment-161090381
A few minor things left, otherwise looks ok.
---
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 mengxr commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161093834
That sounds good to me, but it should be addressed in a separate PR. This
is to fix the compiler bug we hit in `sbt publishLocal`.
---
If your project is set up for
Github user holdenk commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/6386#issuecomment-161093737
I'd obviously like to get this one in if @mengxr or @jkbradley agree that
its worth merging a fix for.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9756#issuecomment-161095491
**[Test build #46980 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46980/consoleFull)**
for PR 9756 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073#issuecomment-161096000
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user andrewor14 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10057#issuecomment-161098646
Why not just reuse the existing `spark.deploy.zookeeper.*` configs?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user nongli commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073#discussion_r46341437
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -712,6 +711,49 @@ object PushPredicateThroughAggregate
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073#issuecomment-161101336
**[Test build #46991 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46991/consoleFull)**
for PR 10073 at commit
Github user nakul02 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9756#issuecomment-161102752
@Lewuathe - Can you take a look at 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
Github user nongli commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073#discussion_r46342571
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -712,6 +711,49 @@ object PushPredicateThroughAggregate
Github user tedyu commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10069#issuecomment-161109455
BlockManagerReplicationSuite.scala, line 384:
```
assert(!blockStatus.storageLevel.useMemory || blockStatus.memSize
>= blockSize,
s"master
Github user andrewor14 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9983#issuecomment-161110957
m1.6
---
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 pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10072#issuecomment-161110871
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/10072#issuecomment-161110869
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/10075#issuecomment-16638
**[Test build #46994 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46994/consoleFull)**
for PR 10075 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10077#issuecomment-16630
**[Test build #47000 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/47000/consoleFull)**
for PR 10077 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10043#issuecomment-161113974
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/10043#issuecomment-161113970
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9988#issuecomment-161115158
**[Test build #46992 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46992/consoleFull)**
for PR 9988 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9988#issuecomment-161115250
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 Botnaim opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10078
SPARK-12080 [SparkCore] Kryo - Support multiple user registrators
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/Botnaim/spark
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9581#issuecomment-161079136
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/9581#issuecomment-161079143
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user squito commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10045#issuecomment-161079531
makes sense. I'm similarly hesistant to expose and then completely rewrite
(I forgot to respond to that question of yours initially on documenting the
timeout -- I'd
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9756#issuecomment-161083875
**[Test build #46980 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46980/consoleFull)**
for PR 9756 at commit
Github user vanzin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9182#discussion_r46335614
--- Diff:
yarn/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/cluster/YarnSchedulerBackend.scala
---
@@ -51,6 +51,64 @@ private[spark] abstract class
Github user vanzin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9182#discussion_r46335588
--- Diff:
yarn/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/cluster/YarnSchedulerBackend.scala
---
@@ -51,6 +51,64 @@ private[spark] abstract class
GitHub user davies opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073
[SPARK-12032] [SQL] Re-order inner joins to do join with conditions first
Currently, the order of joins is exactly the same as SQL query, some
conditions may not pushed down to the correct join,
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9942#issuecomment-161094694
**[Test build #46989 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46989/consoleFull)**
for PR 9942 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9756#issuecomment-161095633
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/10043#issuecomment-161097230
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 squito commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8760#issuecomment-161100737
@kayousterhout this is pretty important for users running clusters with a
larger clusters, eg. a few hundred nodes. We've seen cases where there is some
weird
Github user holdenk commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9581#issuecomment-161100559
also @gweidner
---
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 nongli commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10072#discussion_r46341268
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/Expression.scala
---
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ abstract class Expression extends
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10069#issuecomment-161102087
**[Test build #46977 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46977/consoleFull)**
for PR 10069 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10069#issuecomment-161102210
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/10069#issuecomment-161102239
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/10069#issuecomment-161102207
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/10069#issuecomment-161102237
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10069#issuecomment-161102132
**[Test build #46974 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46974/consoleFull)**
for PR 10069 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/6935#issuecomment-161107477
**[Test build #46996 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46996/consoleFull)**
for PR 6935 at commit
Github user steveloughran commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/6935#issuecomment-161107339
... now it's looking like somethings up with the modtime info in the local
FS; I'm thinking of tracking the file length as well: a bigger file -> more
records
Github user steveloughran commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9182#issuecomment-161107529
thanks -will deal with these on wednesday.
---
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/9819#issuecomment-161108935
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/9819#issuecomment-161108931
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 SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9819#issuecomment-161108921
**[Test build #46998 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46998/consoleFull)**
for PR 9819 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9819#issuecomment-161108750
**[Test build #46998 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46998/consoleFull)**
for PR 9819 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10069#issuecomment-161116628
**[Test build #47002 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/47002/consoleFull)**
for PR 10069 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/6935#issuecomment-161088633
**[Test build #46985 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46985/consoleFull)**
for PR 6935 at commit
Github user holdenk commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8513#issuecomment-161093540
ping @mengxr or @jkbradley if this looks ok to you it would be nice to get
merged in
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user holdenk commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9037#issuecomment-161093434
Hey @jkbradley or @dbtsai could you merge this if it looks ok to you as
well? @yu-iskw took a look and the change is similar to the change we did as
part of
Github user mengxr commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161097842
This didn't actually fix the bug ... The first time it worked but the bug
appeared again in the second run ...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user JoshRosen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10057#issuecomment-161099742
@andrewor14, one of the other configurations is already
`spark.mesos.deploy.zookeeper.url`, so we'd have to change that one. I don't
have super strong feelings
Github user nongli commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10073#discussion_r46342846
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/planning/patterns.scala
---
@@ -133,6 +132,38 @@ object ExtractEquiJoinKeys extends
Github user davies commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10071#issuecomment-161103647
@JoshRosen 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
GitHub user zsxwing opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10076
[SPARK-12078][Core]Fix ByteBuffer.limit misuse
`ByteBuffer.limit` is not the remaining size of ByteBuffer.
`ByteBuffer.limit` is equal to `ByteBuffer.remaining` only if
`ByteBuffer.position` is
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10076#issuecomment-161107268
**[Test build #46995 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46995/consoleFull)**
for PR 10076 at commit
Github user tgravescs commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/9946#issuecomment-161106779
@srowen do you know of any actual use cases this will break? We've
finished running the user code and are exiting anyway so things should just be
shutting down. At
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10072#issuecomment-161110675
**[Test build #46997 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46997/consoleFull)**
for PR 10072 at commit
Github user JoshRosen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10077#discussion_r46346900
--- Diff: project/SparkBuild.scala ---
@@ -671,7 +682,6 @@ object TestSettings {
}
Seq[File]()
},
-
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10072#issuecomment-161110692
**[Test build #46981 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/46981/consoleFull)**
for PR 10072 at commit
1 - 100 of 770 matches
Mail list logo
