Skip to content

Conversation

@liancheng
Copy link
Contributor

Please refer to SPARK-10395 for details.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Sep 1, 2015

Test build #41870 has finished for PR 8553 at commit d7173a9.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Moved this method in front of prepareForRead() for better readability, since this method is called right before prepareForRead().

@liancheng liancheng force-pushed the spark-10395/simplify-parquet-read-support branch from d7173a9 to d8a1ba4 Compare September 14, 2015 07:19
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Sep 14, 2015

Test build #42412 has finished for PR 8553 at commit d8a1ba4.

  • This patch fails Scala style tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Sep 16, 2015

Test build #42543 has finished for PR 8553 at commit 4dfab07.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why did we pass in the maybeRowSchema before? Seems it was not used by prepareForRead.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

IIRC it was used by the old Parquet support code, which has already been removed.

@davies
Copy link
Contributor

davies commented Sep 28, 2015

LGTM

@davies
Copy link
Contributor

davies commented Sep 28, 2015

Merged into master, thanks!

@asfgit asfgit closed this in 14978b7 Sep 28, 2015
@liancheng liancheng deleted the spark-10395/simplify-parquet-read-support branch September 28, 2015 20:56
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