Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[#665] fix(client): keep consistent with vanilla spark when key or value is null #666

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2023

Conversation

zuston
Copy link
Member

@zuston zuston commented Feb 27, 2023

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

keep consistent with vanilla spark when key or value is null

Why are the changes needed?

Fix: #665

The PR of #296 has fixed the bug of NPE of value. But in some cases of production, the key also could be null. So this corner case also should keep consistent with vanilla spark.

And to prevent this logic reverting, the corresponding tests have been attached.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

  1. Unit tests

Copy link
Contributor

@jerqi jerqi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks @zuston , This should be a fix. We should cherry-pick and commit to branch 0.7.

@jerqi jerqi changed the title [#665] feat(client): keep consistent with vanilla spark when key or value is null [#665] fix(client): keep consistent with vanilla spark when key or value is null Feb 27, 2023
@zuston
Copy link
Member Author

zuston commented Feb 27, 2023

LGTM, thanks @zuston , This should be a fix. We should cherry-pick and commit to branch 0.7.

Yes. How to cherry pick in github web?

@zuston zuston merged commit 886c709 into apache:master Feb 27, 2023
@jerqi
Copy link
Contributor

jerqi commented Feb 27, 2023

LGTM, thanks @zuston , This should be a fix. We should cherry-pick and commit to branch 0.7.

Yes. How to cherry pick in github web?

You can use git client in your local machine.

@zuston
Copy link
Member Author

zuston commented Feb 27, 2023

Directly push or submit PR?

@jerqi
Copy link
Contributor

jerqi commented Feb 27, 2023

Directly push or submit PR?

If there is no conflict, it's ok to push directly.

@zuston
Copy link
Member Author

zuston commented Feb 27, 2023

Directly push or submit PR?

If there is no conflict, it's ok to push directly.

Got it.

@zuston zuston deleted the issue-665 branch February 27, 2023 09:23
zuston added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2023
…alue is null (#666)

### What changes were proposed in this pull request?

keep consistent with vanilla spark when key or value is null

### Why are the changes needed?

Fix: #665 

The PR of #296 has fixed the bug of NPE of value. But in some cases of production, the key also could be null. So this corner case also should keep consistent with vanilla spark.

And to prevent this logic from reverting, the corresponding tests have been attached.

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?

No.

### How was this patch tested?

1. Unit tests
advancedxy pushed a commit to advancedxy/incubator-uniffle that referenced this pull request Mar 21, 2023
…y or value is null (apache#666)

### What changes were proposed in this pull request?

keep consistent with vanilla spark when key or value is null

### Why are the changes needed?

Fix: apache#665 

The PR of apache#296 has fixed the bug of NPE of value. But in some cases of production, the key also could be null. So this corner case also should keep consistent with vanilla spark.

And to prevent this logic from reverting, the corresponding tests have been attached.

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?

No.

### How was this patch tested?

1. Unit tests
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.

[Improvement] Keep consistent with vanilla spark when key or value is null
2 participants