Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional
Github user vanzin commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
There's no code to print docs for non-SQL configs, so this change at this
moment in time doesn't really do anything useful. We should close this.
---
Github user jiangxb1987 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
Should we continue with this PR? @gatorsmile @srowen @HyukjinKwon
---
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Github user HyukjinKwon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
I am -0 by the same reason above ^.
---
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 gatorsmile commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
In Spark SQL, the description of all the SQLConf can be displayed through
the SQL commands. However, I am not sure how end users can get the descriptions
of these Spark Conf.
---
If your
Github user heary-cao commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
cc @HyukjinKwon @gatorsmile
---
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 srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
I agree, I don't see a value in this duplicated documentation. It's not in
comments, but in the argument doc strings. It is applied inconsistently. I
would favor consistency. I don't know if it's
Github user heary-cao commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
Currently, some descriptions exist in the source code that are already
documented along with another configs at length in the documentation, such as:
spark.files.openCostInBytes, do we need to
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
What do you mean specifically? there is some documentation that doesn't
exist anymore but should be re-added? or is there some inconsistency to resolve?
---
If your project is set up for it, you
Github user heary-cao commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
Is it possible that we can delete the already deleted comments in the
source code and add them to the another configs at length in the documentation?
because they don't seem to have to be, and
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
I'm saying that it's _because_ they're already documented along with
another configs at length in the documentation, we don't need to duplicate them
in the source code. Now we have to remember to
Github user heary-cao commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
we can get the description of these configuration parameters directly from
the code, except documents. so it's always good to add these descriptions to
the code.
---
If your project is set up
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
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 srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
I think the problem is that this duplicates a bunch of documentation. The
extended description don't need to be in the code or help messages.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18916
I think the problem is that this duplicates a bunch of documentation. The
extended description don't need to be in the code or help messages.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
15 matches
Mail list logo