Skip to content

Conversation

@erikerlandson
Copy link
Contributor

References to dependencies(j) for actually obtaining RDD parents are less common than I originally estimated. It does clarify UnionRDD (also will clarify some of my other PRs)

Use of firstParent[T] is ubiquitous, but not as sure that benefits from being replaced with parent(0)[T].

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@rxin
Copy link
Contributor

rxin commented Aug 9, 2014

Jenkins, test this please.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Aug 9, 2014

QA tests have started for PR 1858. This patch merges cleanly.
View progress: https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/18233/consoleFull

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Aug 9, 2014

QA results for PR 1858:
- This patch PASSES unit tests.
- This patch merges cleanly
- This patch adds no public classes

For more information see test ouptut:
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/18233/consoleFull

@rxin
Copy link
Contributor

rxin commented Aug 9, 2014

Thanks. Merging in master.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in 43af281 Aug 9, 2014
xiliu82 pushed a commit to xiliu82/spark that referenced this pull request Sep 4, 2014
References to dependencies(j) for actually obtaining RDD parents are less common than I originally estimated.   It does clarify UnionRDD (also will clarify some of my other PRs)

Use of firstParent[T] is ubiquitous, but not as sure that benefits from being replaced with parent(0)[T].

Author: Erik Erlandson <[email protected]>

Closes apache#1858 from erikerlandson/spark-2911-pr2 and squashes the following commits:

7ffea74 [Erik Erlandson] [SPARK-2911] apply parent[T](j) to clarify UnionRDD code
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants