Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
TEZ-4227 Introduce convenient methods in TezID subclasses - #166
Merged
Conversation
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
| for (Vertex destVertex : outputVertexEdgeMap.keySet()) { | ||
| if (vertexAlreadyScheduled(destVertex)) { // Nothing to do if already scheduled. | ||
| } else { | ||
| if (!vertexAlreadyScheduled(destVertex)) { // Nothing to do if already scheduled. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you can delete the comment "Nothing to do" from here as it corresponds to the deleted branch
| import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.api.records.ApplicationId; | ||
| public interface DAGIDAware { | ||
| TezDAGID getDAGId(); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
even if it looks strange (too many capitals), this might be changed to
getDAGID();
to stay consistent with others, so it should suggest that a TezID Object is returned here which is "ID", not an integer, which is id
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Change-Id: I6cabfa75e9b6b62e41ba8c2cc5e3d2d1a8a49102
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
tez-yetus
commented
Feb 1, 2022
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
abstractdog
approved these changes
Feb 6, 2022
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 after addressing comments, this patch looks good to me, approving
I like the introduction of *IDAware interfaces, also having a consistent letter case: "ID" for TezID objects, "Id" for the integer inside
as the patch touches lots of code, let me give another 24-48h for others to tell their opinion (cc: @rbalamohan, @jteagles)
@ghanko: could you please check how the patch applies to branch-0.9? I'm pretty sure it has a bunch of conflicts, but I'm hoping all of them are obvious...if we could have the patch on branch-0.9, it helps to reduce the divergence between master/branch-0.9...only if it doesn't take too much time
This was referenced Oct 11, 2025
This was referenced Oct 31, 2025
Closed
This was referenced Nov 12, 2025
This was referenced Nov 21, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Change-Id: I6cabfa75e9b6b62e41ba8c2cc5e3d2d1a8a49102