Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17926
Does this cause any incompatibility with existing code?
---
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 ConeyLiu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17890
Thansk @dongjoon-hyun. Hi @srowen, code is updated, because the `Tigger`
location is changed after your pr.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user zero323 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17891
Thanks @yanboliang!
---
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,
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934
**[Test build #76746 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76746/testReport)**
for PR 17934 at commit
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17900
Merged to 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 feature
enabled and wishes so, or
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17904
Merged to master/2.2
---
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,
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17933
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76732/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user victor-wong commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17782
@srowen
Thanks for replying. I tested with master branch and it turned out the
issue still existed.
I create a new PR against master branch,
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17937.
Github user victor-wong commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17937
Comments on last PR, https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17782.
---
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 issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17887
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76735/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user victor-wong closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17782
---
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
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17887
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17858
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17858
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76744/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17907
Yes, it is likely more accurate to not base the PCA on the Gramian. However
it's probably going to be more efficient than what the SVD method does even
when operating locally. If this change makes
Github user cloud-fan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17887#discussion_r115717329
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/regexpExpressions.scala
---
@@ -144,7 +144,31 @@ case class Like(left:
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17938
(I think I am not supposed to decide this and probably the best is the
confirmation from a commiter)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user yanboliang commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17891
LGTM, merged into master and branch-2.2. 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 AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17933
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 project does not have this feature
Github user MLnick commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934#discussion_r115695253
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/ml/feature/StringIndexer.scala ---
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ object StringIndexer extends
Github user MLnick commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934#discussion_r115695377
--- Diff: mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/ml/feature/Imputer.scala ---
@@ -180,9 +181,10 @@ object Imputer extends DefaultParamsReadable[Imputer] {
Github user ala commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16960
True. There's a couple of lines that should be removed with this change,
that were left behind. numGeneratedRows should be gone.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user jaceklaskowski commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17917#discussion_r115711771
--- Diff:
external/kafka-0-10-sql/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/kafka010/KafkaRelation.scala
---
@@ -143,4 +143,6 @@ private[kafka010] class
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
---
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 cloud-fan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17918
thanks, merging to master/2.2!
---
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
Github user wzhfy commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16677
@hvanhovell @cloud-fan We have seen value of this PR in our customer
scenarios, and that's why we started a discussion in dev list before. And thank
@viirya to discuss with us and implement it.
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17891
---
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 issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17918
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17918
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76731/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17898
@jtengyp I think we won't proceed with this version, so this can be closed,
but see the discussion at https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17890
**[Test build #3709 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/NewSparkPullRequestBuilder/3709/testReport)**
for PR 17890 at commit
Github user MLnick commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17862#discussion_r115698645
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/ml/classification/LinearSVC.scala ---
@@ -205,15 +233,21 @@ class LinearSVC @Since("2.2.0") (
val
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17770
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17770
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76734/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17400
**[Test build #76738 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76738/testReport)**
for PR 17400 at commit
GitHub user zero323 opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17938
[DOCS][SQL] Document bucketing and partitioning in SQL guide
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
- Add Scala, Python and Java examples for `partitionBy`, `sortBy` and
Github user ConeyLiu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
hi @jerryshaoï¼thanks for your review. In #17898ï¼there is a potential
buffer to cache the dataï¼so we should control the groupsize very careful.
Because for small sizeï¼it need fetch more
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17935
**[Test build #76745 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76745/testReport)**
for PR 17935 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17933
**[Test build #76732 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76732/testReport)**
for PR 17933 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17890
**[Test build #3707 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/NewSparkPullRequestBuilder/3707/testReport)**
for PR 17890 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76733/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17887
**[Test build #76735 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76735/testReport)**
for PR 17887 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
**[Test build #76733 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76733/testReport)**
for PR 17930 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17937
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 project does not have this
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17770
**[Test build #76734 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76734/testReport)**
for PR 17770 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934
**[Test build #76746 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76746/testReport)**
for PR 17934 at commit
Github user zero323 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17077
@gatorsmile #17938
---
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,
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17931
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 project does not have this feature
Github user ConeyLiu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
Cool, you see the `iterator` operation can be divided in two cases:
1. get the block from local, this case is very good.
2. get the block from remote.
- The block is cached
Github user cloud-fan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
thanks for the review, merging to master/2.2/2.1!
---
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 10110346 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17906
Please reveiw itï¼thanks @dongjoon-hyun @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 does not
Github user ConeyLiu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
A cluster version of the comparison results, I will be given later.
---
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 ConeyLiu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
Hi @viirya, can you help to review this? I thinks you are familiar with
this, because you dad tried to solve it before.
And also ping @srowen , @mridulm, @jerryshao.
---
If your project
Github user jerryshao commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
Looks like there's a similar PR #17898 trying to address this issue, can
you please elaborate your difference compared to that one?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user MLnick commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17919#discussion_r115692011
--- Diff: mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/ml/recommendation/ALS.scala
---
@@ -451,6 +439,8 @@ class ALSModel private[ml] (
@Since("1.6.0")
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17918
**[Test build #76731 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76731/testReport)**
for PR 17918 at commit
GitHub user victor-wong opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17937
Reload credentials file config when app starts with checkpoint file iâ¦
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Currently credentials file configuration is recovered from
Github user mpjlu commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17742
** The most optimized version would be doing a quickselect on each row and
select top k.
** An easy-to-implement version would be:
I test both of the methods, the best performance is about 50%
Github user MLnick commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17742
It's true I think my native BLAS is not working will have to check - but
yeah 1.5-2x matches what I've seen in my comparisons
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17400
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 project does not have this feature
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17400
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76740/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17400
**[Test build #76740 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76740/testReport)**
for PR 17400 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
**[Test build #76739 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76739/testReport)**
for PR 17930 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17935
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17858
**[Test build #76744 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76744/testReport)**
for PR 17858 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17935
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76745/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17918
---
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 ConeyLiu opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
[SPARK-20638][Core][WIP]Optimize the CartesianRDD to reduce repeatedly data
fetching
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This path aims to solve the poor performance of
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
**[Test build #3708 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/NewSparkPullRequestBuilder/3708/testReport)**
for PR 17936 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17890
**[Test build #3707 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/NewSparkPullRequestBuilder/3707/testReport)**
for PR 17890 at commit
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17904
---
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 asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17900
---
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 jerryshao commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
From my first glance, I have several questions:
1. If the parent's partition has already been cached in local blockmanager,
do we need to cache again?
2. There will be situation
Github user MLnick commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934#discussion_r115693156
--- Diff:
mllib/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/ml/classification/LinearSVC.scala ---
@@ -131,7 +132,6 @@ class LinearSVC @Since("2.2.0") (
*/
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76746/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934
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 project does not have this feature
Github user ueshin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17933#discussion_r115702646
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/expressions/datetimeExpressions.scala
---
@@ -954,8 +955,9 @@ case class
Github user ueshin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17933#discussion_r115702672
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/util/DateTimeUtils.scala
---
@@ -98,6 +99,21 @@ object DateTimeUtils {
sdf
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17935
**[Test build #76745 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76745/testReport)**
for PR 17935 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17938
**[Test build #76748 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76748/testReport)**
for PR 17938 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17938
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76748/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17938
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 project does not have this feature
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17926
I don't think so (this is Python ... ) for both positional and keyword
arguments. (If the new `numSlices` is added in the middle of the arguments it
will break for positional arguments but this
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17936
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 project does not have this
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76742/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17934
**[Test build #76742 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76742/testReport)**
for PR 17934 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17858
**[Test build #76744 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76744/testReport)**
for PR 17858 at commit
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17923
The two displays are at least inconsistent. If displaying "50/50" instead
of "53/50" is intentional and been the behavior for a while, let's stick with
that. However if some page still shows things
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17932
LGTM as targeted.
---
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
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17686
Merged to 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 feature
enabled and wishes so, or
Github user MLnick commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17742
BLAS3 with still keeping the output size as `n x m` rather than `n x k`
results in massively more shuffle data - I don't think any solution based on
exploding the intermediate data so much can be as
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17933
**[Test build #76747 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76747/testReport)**
for PR 17933 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17928
**[Test build #76737 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76737/testReport)**
for PR 17928 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76739/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17930
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 project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17938
**[Test build #76748 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76748/testReport)**
for PR 17938 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17931
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76741/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/17931
**[Test build #76741 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/76741/testReport)**
for PR 17931 at commit
1 - 100 of 474 matches
Mail list logo
