[SPARK-47301][SQL][TESTS][FOLLOWUP] Remove workaround for ParquetIOSuite #46577
Conversation
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
Contributor
Author
panbingkun
changed the title
yaooqinn
approved these changes
May 14, 2024
LuciferYang
approved these changes
May 14, 2024
cloud-fan
approved these changes
May 14, 2024
Contributor
|
thanks, merging to master! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
The pr aims to remove workaround for ParquetIOSuite.
Why are the changes needed?
After #46562 is completed, the reason why the ut
SPARK-7837 Do not close output writer twice when commitTask() failsfailed due to different event processing time sequence no longer exists, so we remove the previous workaround here.Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.