Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

o `note.json`. It could >>>>>>> remove interpreter-binding information, keep default interpreter when >>>>>>> extracting note. Moreover it also helps to reduce our server code as >>>>>>> well. >>>>>>> >>>&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

r code as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you guys think of? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 6:16 PM, Sanjay Dasgupta < >>>>>> sanjay.dasgu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

This will simplify the >>>>>> GUI >>>>>> somewhat. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> - Sanjay

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

>>>> “So usually we would recommend user to specify the full qualified >>>>>>> interpreter name.” >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - I usually recommend the exact opposite to our users. We frequently >>>>>>> change in

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

gt;> - I usually recommend the exact opposite to our users. We frequently >>>>>> change interpreter groups to allow for different Spark cluster settings >>>>>> (number of executors, memory, etc). Users with more demanding >&

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

>> paragraph they would then have to manually edit the start of every >>>> paragraph before they could run their note using a different interpreter >>>> group. Very tedious! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> But I agree the s

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

t; fully qualified name of the interpreter that was actually used to produce >>> that output. Or a clearly defined ‘default interpreter group’ text in the >>> toolbar at the top of each notebook. Make it a dropdown so it would be >>> easy to change the default. >>> &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

y defined ‘default interpreter group’ text in the >> toolbar at the top of each notebook. Make it a dropdown so it would be easy >> to change the default. >> >> >> >> *From:* Jeff Zhang >> *Sent:* 06 July 2018 08:53 >> *To:* users@zeppelin.apache.org >&

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

* 06 July 2018 08:53 > *To:* users@zeppelin.apache.org > *Cc:* dev > *Subject:* EXT: Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ? > > > > > > We already allow setting default interpreter when creating note. Another > way to set default interpreter is to reorder the

[DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

that output. Or a clearly defined ‘default interpreter group’ text in the toolbar at the top of each notebook. Make it a dropdown so it would be easy to change the default. From: Jeff Zhang Sent: 06 July 2018 08:53 To: users@zeppelin.apache.org Cc: dev Subject: EXT: Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

We already allow setting default interpreter when creating note. Another way to set default interpreter is to reorder the interpreter setting binding in note page. But personally I don't recommend user to use short interpreter name because of default interpreter. 2 Reaons: 1. It introduce

Re: [DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

There are two purposes of interpreter binding. One is what you mentioned and another one is to manage a default interpreter. If we provide a new way to set default interpreter, I think we can remove them :-) We could set permissions in other ways. Overall, +1 On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Jeff

[DISCUSS] Is interpreter binding necessary ?

Hi Folks, I raise this thread to discuss whether we need the interpreter binding. Currently when user create notes, they have to bind interpreters to their notes in note page. Otherwise they will hit interpreter not found issue. Besides that in zeppelin server side, we maintain the interpreter