Skip to content

Conversation

@zsxwing
Copy link
Member

@zsxwing zsxwing commented Jul 25, 2016

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

SubexpressionEliminationSuite."Semantic equals and hash" assumes the default AttributeReference's exprId wont' be "ExprId(1)". However, that depends on when this test runs. It may happen to use "ExprId(1)".

This PR detects the conflict and makes sure we create a different ExprId when the conflict happens.

How was this patch tested?

Jenkins unit tests.

…mantic equals and hash"

SubexpressionEliminationSuite."Semantic equals and hash" assumes the default AttributeReference's exprId wont' be "ExprId(1)". However, that depends on when this test runs. It may happen to use "ExprId(1)".

This PR detects the conflict and makes sure we create a different ExprId when the conflict happens.
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Jul 25, 2016

Test build #62838 has finished for PR 14350 at commit 4c6dfbc.

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

@zsxwing
Copy link
Member Author

zsxwing commented Jul 25, 2016

/cc @yhuai

@yhuai
Copy link
Contributor

yhuai commented Jul 25, 2016

LGTM

@zsxwing
Copy link
Member Author

zsxwing commented Jul 25, 2016

Merging to master and 2.0.

asfgit pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 25, 2016
…nEliminationSuite."Semantic equals and hash"

## What changes were proposed in this pull request?

SubexpressionEliminationSuite."Semantic equals and hash" assumes the default AttributeReference's exprId wont' be "ExprId(1)". However, that depends on when this test runs. It may happen to use "ExprId(1)".

This PR detects the conflict and makes sure we create a different ExprId when the conflict happens.

## How was this patch tested?

Jenkins unit tests.

Author: Shixiong Zhu <shixiong@databricks.com>

Closes #14350 from zsxwing/SPARK-16715.

(cherry picked from commit 12f490b)
Signed-off-by: Shixiong Zhu <shixiong@databricks.com>
@asfgit asfgit closed this in 12f490b Jul 25, 2016
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.

3 participants