Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
[SPARK-11780][SQL] Add type aliases backwards compatibility - #10635
[SPARK-11780][SQL] Add type aliases backwards compatibility#10635maropu wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
SparkQA
commented
Jan 7, 2016
Test build #48914 has finished for PR 10635 at commit
|
SparkQA
commented
Jan 7, 2016
Test build #48925 has finished for PR 10635 at commit
|
maropu
commented
Jan 7, 2016
retest this please |
SparkQA
commented
Jan 8, 2016
Test build #48988 has finished for PR 10635 at commit
|
marmbrus
commented
Jan 8, 2016
Does this actually let you use one source to compile against both versions of Spark? |
maropu
commented
Jan 8, 2016
marmbrus
commented
Jan 8, 2016
I could be missing something, but it seems like since you had to manually exclude things here to make it compile, users are going to run into problems. Can you actually make a program that uses these types and try and see if you can make it work with both Spark 1.5 and Spark 1.6? |
maropu
commented
Jan 13, 2016
@marmbrus okay and I'll try it in a day. |
maropu
commented
Jan 13, 2016
@marmbrus checked; Also, I checked that this pr resolved this issue, that is, we can compile them in both versions. |
maropu
commented
Jan 14, 2016
I found that aggregation functions such as |
SparkQA
commented
Jan 14, 2016
Test build #49355 has finished for PR 10635 at commit
|
marmbrus
commented
Jan 14, 2016
I'm confused. The repo you link to compiles fine against Spark 1.6.0. |
maropu
commented
Jan 14, 2016
Sorry that you get confused. |
Added type aliases in org.apache.spark.sql.types for classes moved to org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.util.
maropu
commented
Jan 21, 2016
@marmbrus ping |
SparkQA
commented
Jan 21, 2016
Test build #49876 has finished for PR 10635 at commit
|
marmbrus
commented
Jan 25, 2016
Okay, this seems good, but can you reopen it against branch-1.6? I don't think that we want to continue to offer compatibility once the major version changes in 2.0. |
maropu
commented
Jan 26, 2016
@marmbrus Okay, I'll do that. |
Rework from #9935 because it's stale.