Skip to content

Conversation

@ueshin
Copy link
Member

@ueshin ueshin commented Aug 3, 2020

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

This is a follow-up of #29278.
This PR changes the config name to switch allow/disallow SparkContext in executors as per the comment #29278 (review).

Why are the changes needed?

The config name spark.executor.allowSparkContext is more reasonable.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

Yes, the config name is changed.

How was this patch tested?

Updated tests.

Copy link
Member

@dongjoon-hyun dongjoon-hyun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, @ueshin !

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Aug 3, 2020

Test build #127005 has finished for PR 29340 at commit 2602fe8.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Member

+1 I think this makes more sense.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Aug 4, 2020

Test build #127013 has finished for PR 29340 at commit 7e0f7fc.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@cloud-fan
Copy link
Contributor

retest this please

@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Member

I am merging this to get this in Spark 3.0.1. The test failure in Kafka will be fixed at #29343.

@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Member

Merged to master.

@dongjoon-hyun
Copy link
Member

Please note that there is a PR for the 170 Cache related failures.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Aug 4, 2020

Test build #127023 has finished for PR 29340 at commit 7e0f7fc.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Aug 4, 2020

Test build #127021 has finished for PR 29340 at commit 7e0f7fc.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants