Skip to content

[SQL]RowBasedKeyValueBatch reuse valueRow too - #15193

Closed
yaooqinn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:masterfrom
yaooqinn:reuse-value
Closed

[SQL]RowBasedKeyValueBatch reuse valueRow too#15193
yaooqinn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:masterfrom
yaooqinn:reuse-value

Conversation

@yaooqinn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

reuse the cached valueRow in RowBasedKeyValueBatch

How was this patch tested?

existing ut

@yaooqinn

yaooqinn commented Sep 22, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

cc @ooq@sameeragarwal@davies@srowen is it right and necessary?

@AmplabJenkins

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@ooq

ooq commented Feb 8, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the patch @yaooqinn . As per comments for getValueRow, because getValueRow(id) is always called after getKeyRow(id) with the same id, we use `getValueFromKey(id) to retrieve value row and use the id as a flag for cached/uncached. The patch is unnecessary IMO. Also, with the patch code, it seems value row is not pointing to the correct position?

@yaooqinn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@ooq Thanks very much for your review. As we always getKeyRow(id) before we getValueRow(id) with the same id, we don't retreive the keyRow from the batch but use the cached one. IMO, we can mark the valueRow as cached too because no action seems to overwritten it, then we'd rather use the cached valueRow than retrieve a new one .

@ooq

ooq commented Feb 14, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@yaooqinn Do you have any benchmarks on the performance difference? I think pointTo() is pretty cheap. And does the patch pass the tests? I think valueRow is not updated correctly in your patch.

@maropumaropu mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2017
peter-toth pushed a commit to peter-toth/spark that referenced this pull request Oct 6, 2018
This pr proposed to close stale PRs. Currently, we have 400+ open PRs and there are some stale PRs whose JIRA tickets have been already closed and whose JIRA tickets does not exist (also, they seem not to be minor issues).
// Open PRs whose JIRA tickets have been already closed
Closesapache#11785Closesapache#13027Closesapache#13614Closesapache#13761Closesapache#15197Closesapache#14006Closesapache#12576Closesapache#15447Closesapache#13259Closesapache#15616Closesapache#14473Closesapache#16638Closesapache#16146Closesapache#17269Closesapache#17313Closesapache#17418Closesapache#17485Closesapache#17551Closesapache#17463Closesapache#17625
// Open PRs whose JIRA tickets does not exist and they are not minor issues
Closesapache#10739Closesapache#15193Closesapache#15344Closesapache#14804Closesapache#16993Closesapache#17040Closesapache#15180Closesapache#17238
N/A
Author: Takeshi Yamamuro <yamamuro@apache.org>
Closesapache#17734 from maropu/resolved_pr.
Change-Id: Id2e590aa7283fe5ac01424d30a40df06da6098b5
zifeif2 pushed a commit to zifeif2/spark that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2025
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This pr proposed to close stale PRs. Currently, we have 400+ open PRs and there are some stale PRs whose JIRA tickets have been already closed and whose JIRA tickets does not exist (also, they seem not to be minor issues).
// Open PRs whose JIRA tickets have been already closed
Closesapache#11785Closesapache#13027Closesapache#13614Closesapache#13761Closesapache#15197Closesapache#14006Closesapache#12576Closesapache#15447Closesapache#13259Closesapache#15616Closesapache#14473Closesapache#16638Closesapache#16146Closesapache#17269Closesapache#17313Closesapache#17418Closesapache#17485Closesapache#17551Closesapache#17463Closesapache#17625
// Open PRs whose JIRA tickets does not exist and they are not minor issues
Closesapache#10739Closesapache#15193Closesapache#15344Closesapache#14804Closesapache#16993Closesapache#17040Closesapache#15180Closesapache#17238
## How was this patch tested?
N/A
Author: Takeshi Yamamuro <yamamuro@apache.org>
Closesapache#17734 from maropu/resolved_pr.
Sign up for freeto 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.

3 participants

@yaooqinn@AmplabJenkins@ooq