Skip to content

Conversation

@viirya
Copy link
Member

@viirya viirya commented Nov 18, 2017

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

For common expression types, such as BinaryExpression and TernaryExpression, the combination of generated codes of children can possibly be large. We should put the codes into functions to prevent possible 64kb compile error.

How was this patch tested?

Added test.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 18, 2017

Test build #83987 has finished for PR 19780 at commit e08259a.

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

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 18, 2017

Test build #83988 has finished for PR 19780 at commit dc49b6e.

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

@viirya
Copy link
Member Author

viirya commented Nov 19, 2017

cc @cloud-fan @kiszk

@kiszk
Copy link
Member

kiszk commented Nov 19, 2017

Could you add a test case?

@viirya
Copy link
Member Author

viirya commented Nov 19, 2017

@kiszk I added a test. But I think after #19767 is merged, the generated codes will be changed too. I may need to adjust the test case after that.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 19, 2017

Test build #84000 has finished for PR 19780 at commit 250e8a6.

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

@viirya viirya changed the title [SPARK-22551][SQL][WIP] Prevent possible 64kb compile error for common expression types [SPARK-22551][SQL] Prevent possible 64kb compile error for common expression types Nov 20, 2017
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 20, 2017

Test build #84008 has finished for PR 19780 at commit 3742f22.

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

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 20, 2017

Test build #84009 has finished for PR 19780 at commit 64e93ec.

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

@viirya
Copy link
Member Author

viirya commented Nov 23, 2017

I can't reproduce the issue after #19767 is merged. Hopefully it solves this issue too, so I will close this. If not and I can reproduce it later, I will re-open this.

@viirya viirya closed this Nov 23, 2017
@viirya viirya deleted the SPARK-22551 branch December 27, 2023 18:35
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