Github user zsxwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
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 does not have this feature
Github user koeninger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
LGTM, thanks for talking it through
---
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/15397
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/15397
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66908/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
**[Test build #66908 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66908/consoleFull)**
for PR 15397 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
**[Test build #66908 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66908/consoleFull)**
for PR 15397 at commit
Github user zsxwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
> My main point is that whoever implements SPARK-17812 is going to have to
deal with the issue shown in SPARK-17782, which means much of this patch is
going to need to be changed anyway.
Github user koeninger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
My main point is that whoever implements SPARK-17812 is going to have to
deal with the issue shown in SPARK-17782, which means much of this patch is
going to need to be changed anyway.
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
**[Test build #66849 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66849/consoleFull)**
for PR 15397 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
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/15397
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66849/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user zsxwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
@koeninger sorry for the delay. Right now KafkaSource doesn't support
external group id, so we don't need to concern about how to fetching committed
offsets. Any other cases that I'm missing?
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
**[Test build #66849 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66849/consoleFull)**
for PR 15397 at commit
Github user koeninger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
Look at the poll/seek implementation in the DStream's subscribe and
subscribe pattern when user offsets are provided, i.e. the problem that
triggered this ticket to begin with. You're going
Github user zsxwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
> How is this going to work with assign? It seems like it's just avoiding
the problem, not fixing it.
We can seek to the offsets provided by the user.
---
If your project is set up for
Github user koeninger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
How is this going to work with assign? It seems like it's just avoiding
the problem, not fixing it.
---
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 issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
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/15397
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66543/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
**[Test build #66543 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66543/consoleFull)**
for PR 15397 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
**[Test build #66543 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/66543/consoleFull)**
for PR 15397 at commit
Github user zsxwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15397
/cc @tdas @koeninger
---
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
21 matches
Mail list logo
