-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.3k
SPARK-1652: Remove incorrect deprecation warning in spark-submit #578
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.
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
Closed
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nit: is YARN relevant? Could call it SPARK_SUBMIT and use it for standalone with cluster deploy mode as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One problem we have with existing configs and envs is that someone creates it for one purpose and then it gets used for a zillion other purposes and it becomes really hard to understand what it's for.
So in general I'm biased at this point towards creating fairly narrowly scoped internal options whenever possible and generalizing them (lazily) when it's necessary. In this case I'd actually hope we can just remove this thing if/when we decide to remove the YARN clients.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sryza if you feel really strongly I could make it more general. I'm a bit scarred from some cases where options like this have taken on lives of their own :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Even if it's a hack / workaround, I think it's probably better to work with the assumption that it'll end up sticking around for a while. With that in mind, a system property that signifies we started something from spark-submit makes more sense to me than a system property that signifying we started from spark-submit AND happen to be running YARN. Especially if we'll need a similar one for standalone mode. Do you think SPARK_SUBMIT_YARN would be less likely to be abused than SPARK_SUBMIT?
That said, it's a tiny issue, and I don't feel super strongly, so if you feel differently, go ahead with the current patch.