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

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