Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170756485
Sure, let me close it.
---
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 gatorsmile closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689
---
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 rxin commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170755933
@gatorsmile I think we'd need more proper design for limits. Let's close
this as later.
---
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/10689#issuecomment-170470751
**[Test build #49117 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49117/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user hvanhovell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170473951
@gatorsmile the fix looks good.
@rxin / @marmbrus / @gatorsmile I am not sure if we should support this at
all. Using a limit in SELECT's connected by a
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170507628
**[Test build #49117 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49117/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170507968
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/10689#issuecomment-170507969
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
Github user JoshRosen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170469510
Jenkins, retest 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
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170691919
Yeah! I just read the implementation of `Limit`. As you said, the current
one is not highly efficient, especially when the number of limits is not small.
---
If
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170619409
Give two tables `tbl_a` and `tbl_b`, `tbl_a` has **billions** of rows but
`tbl_b` has **thousands** of rows. `tbl_a` has one column `col_frkey_tbl_a`
whose values
Github user hvanhovell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170597130
@gatorsmile I do see the performance benefits of ```limit``` while
processing. The reservation I am having is reasoning about non-toplevel
```limit``` statements. A
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170589671
@hvanhovell Let me share my two cents:
- We have another PR to push down `Limit` through `Union ALL`. However,
it is impossible to push `Limit` through `Union
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170634356
**[Test build #49158 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49158/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170634811
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/10689#issuecomment-170634799
**[Test build #49158 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49158/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170634808
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/10689#issuecomment-170638417
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/10689#issuecomment-170638416
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/10689#issuecomment-170638728
**[Test build #49160 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49160/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170670978
**[Test build #49160 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49160/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170671485
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/10689#issuecomment-170671482
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 marmbrus commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170673019
That example seems kind of artificial to me. Additionally large
non-terminal limits are not planned very well today so I think users are going
to be surprised.
---
Github user gatorsmile commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#discussion_r49290681
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/CatalystQlSuite.scala
---
@@ -49,4 +49,11 @@ class CatalystQlSuite extends PlanTest
Github user gatorsmile commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170422086
@hvanhovell @rxin Could you take a look? Thank you!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well.
Github user rxin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#discussion_r49288754
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/CatalystQlSuite.scala
---
@@ -49,4 +49,11 @@ class CatalystQlSuite extends PlanTest {
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170421465
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/10689#issuecomment-170421463
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/10689#issuecomment-170421391
**[Test build #49080 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49080/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user rxin commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#discussion_r49292062
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/CatalystQlSuite.scala
---
@@ -49,4 +50,16 @@ class CatalystQlSuite extends PlanTest {
Github user gatorsmile commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#discussion_r49292180
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/CatalystQlSuite.scala
---
@@ -49,4 +50,16 @@ class CatalystQlSuite extends PlanTest
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170442349
**[Test build #49094 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49094/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170449790
**[Test build #49094 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49094/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170449852
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/10689#issuecomment-170449853
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
GitHub user gatorsmile opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689
[SPARK-12745] [SQL] Hive Parser: Limit is not supported inside Set Operation
The current SQLContext allows the following query, which is copied from a
test case in SQLQuerySuite:
```
Github user SparkQA commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10689#issuecomment-170413432
**[Test build #49080 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/49080/consoleFull)**
for PR 10689 at commit
38 matches
Mail list logo
