Skip to content

Conversation

@hujy
Copy link
Contributor

@hujy hujy commented May 4, 2016

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

The patch referenced SPARK-14772
After apply this patch, user can choose to just copy the default param map or the param map.

How was this patch tested?

Unit test, test locally.

return self._defaultParamMap[param]

@since("1.4.0")
def extractParamMap(self, extra=None):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please document this new param

@holdenk
Copy link
Contributor

holdenk commented May 4, 2016

Thanks for tackling this issue :) For a better understanding - is there a reason why adding a flag for this behaviour instead of just changing it (since it is a bug) - do we expect people to want to explicitly copy the default param map in this way?

@holdenk
Copy link
Contributor

holdenk commented May 4, 2016

Also it would be good to have tests to ensure the change has the desired impact.

@hujy
Copy link
Contributor Author

hujy commented May 5, 2016

@holdenk, I'm checking with @jkbradley about "respect the difference between defaultParamMap and paramMap" in the requirement. The new input parameter is optional and will not impact the user not want to copy default param. : )

@hujy
Copy link
Contributor Author

hujy commented May 13, 2016

ok with test

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@holdenk
Copy link
Contributor

holdenk commented Oct 7, 2016

So to trigger the test we will need one of the committers - e.g. @davies is one of the more active Python committers (although he has been busy lately) so we can also check with @MLnick . It would also be nice if you could document the param (even if we don't expect the user to use it - its useful to have it noted for other developers and so users know not to worry about it).

@jkbradley
Copy link
Member

@hujy Thank you for sending this PR, and apologies for not seeing it earlier. Since the other PR for this JIRA is ready to merge, could you please close this issue? Thanks again!

@srowen srowen mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2017
@asfgit asfgit closed this in b70c03a Mar 23, 2017
zifeif2 pushed a commit to zifeif2/spark that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2025
Closes apache#16819
Closes apache#13467
Closes apache#16083
Closes apache#17135
Closes apache#8785
Closes apache#16278
Closes apache#16997
Closes apache#17073
Closes apache#17220

Added:
Closes apache#12059
Closes apache#12524
Closes apache#12888
Closes apache#16061

Author: Sean Owen <sowen@cloudera.com>

Closes apache#17386 from srowen/StalePRs.
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