Skip to content

[SPARK-28939][SQL][FOLLOWUP] Fix JDK11 compilation due to ambiguous reference #25738

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
dongjoon-hyun wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[SPARK-28939][SQL][FOLLOWUP] Fix JDK11 compilation due to ambiguous reference #25738

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/SQLExecutionRDD.scala
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ class SQLExecutionRDD(
private val sqlConfigs = conf.getAllConfs
private lazy val sqlConfExecutorSide = {
val props = new Properties()
props.putAll(sqlConfigs.asJava)
sqlConfigs.foreach { case (k, v) => props.setProperty(k, v) }
Copy link
Contributor

@hvanhovell hvanhovell Sep 10, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know it is a bit late, but why are we not setting the configurations directly?

Copy link
Contributor

@hvanhovell hvanhovell Sep 10, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@mgaido91 any idea?

Copy link
Contributor

@mgaido91 mgaido91 Sep 10, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the reason why I created the properties object was to have it in a synchronized block, but since we are in a lazy val it is probably useless...

Copy link
Contributor

@cloud-fan cloud-fan Sep 10, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@mgaido91 can you send a followup PR to clean it up? Now we can't set the SQL confs in a batch and I don't think it's useful to have this Properties.

Copy link
Member Author

@dongjoon-hyun dongjoon-hyun Sep 10, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hvanhovell and @mgaido91 . Feel free to make a follow-up if we need. Also, please apply that in the backporting PR, #25734, before merging for consistency.

Copy link
Contributor

@mgaido91 mgaido91 Sep 10, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sure @cloud-fan , I am doing that. Thanks for the remainder @dongjoon-hyun, I'll update the backport PR once this is stable. Thanks.

val newConf = new SQLConf()
newConf.setConf(props)
newConf
Expand Down