Skip to content

Conversation

@uncleGen
Copy link
Contributor

@uncleGen uncleGen commented Mar 3, 2017

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

improve the log message when query result does not match.

before pr:

== Results ==
!== Correct Answer - 3 ==   == Spark Answer - 3 ==
 [1]                        [1]
 [2]                        [2]
 [3]                        [3]

after pr:

== Results ==
!== Correct Answer - 3 == == Spark Answer - 3 ==
!RowType[string] RowType[integer]
[1] [1]
[2] [2]
[3] [3]

== Results ==
!== Correct Answer - 3 ==   == Spark Answer - 3 ==
!struct<value:string>       struct<value:int>
 [1]                        [1]
 [2]                        [2]
 [3]                        [3]

How was this patch tested?

Jenkins

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Mar 3, 2017

Test build #73806 has finished for PR 17145 at commit de98dfd.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Mar 3, 2017

Test build #73817 has finished for PR 17145 at commit f5a35f6.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@uncleGen
Copy link
Contributor Author

uncleGen commented Mar 3, 2017

unrelated failure: org.apache.spark.sql.kafka010.KafkaSourceStressForDontFailOnDataLossSuite.stress test for failOnDataLoss=false. retest this please.

@uncleGen uncleGen changed the title [SPARK-19805][TEST] Log the row type when query type dose not match [SPARK-19805][TEST] Log the row type when query result dose not match Mar 3, 2017
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Mar 3, 2017

Test build #73825 has started for PR 17145 at commit f5a35f6.

@uncleGen
Copy link
Contributor Author

uncleGen commented Mar 3, 2017

test crash. retest this please.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Mar 3, 2017

Test build #73830 has finished for PR 17145 at commit f5a35f6.

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

@uncleGen
Copy link
Contributor Author

uncleGen commented Mar 3, 2017

cc @srowen

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Mar 3, 2017

Test build #73832 has finished for PR 17145 at commit f5a35f6.

  • 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.

How about using schema.catalogString or schema.treeString here? Rolling your own seems unnecessary.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK, Iet me have a test.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hvanhovell After use schema.catalogString

!== Correct Answer - 1 ==      == Spark Answer - 1 ==
!struct<_1:string,_2:string>   struct<_1:int,_2:string>
![1,a]                         [1,a]

@uncleGen uncleGen force-pushed the improve-test-result branch from f5a35f6 to 2cff2b2 Compare March 5, 2017 05:07
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Mar 5, 2017

Test build #73919 has finished for PR 17145 at commit 2cff2b2.

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

@uncleGen
Copy link
Contributor Author

uncleGen commented Mar 5, 2017

cc @hvanhovell and @srowen

@hvanhovell
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM - merging to master thanks.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in f48461a Mar 5, 2017
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