Skip to content
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

[SQL]RowBasedKeyValueBatch reuse valueRow too #15193

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[SQL]RowBasedKeyValueBatch reuse valueRow too #15193

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

yaooqinn
Copy link
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

reuse the cached valueRow in RowBasedKeyValueBatch

How was this patch tested?

existing ut

@yaooqinn
Copy link
Member Author

yaooqinn commented Sep 22, 2016

cc @ooq @sameeragarwal @davies @srowen is it right and necessary?

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@ooq
Copy link
Contributor

ooq commented Feb 8, 2017

Thanks for the patch @yaooqinn . As per comments for getValueRow, because getValueRow(id) is always called after getKeyRow(id) with the same id, we use `getValueFromKey(id) to retrieve value row and use the id as a flag for cached/uncached. The patch is unnecessary IMO. Also, with the patch code, it seems value row is not pointing to the correct position?

@yaooqinn
Copy link
Member Author

@ooq Thanks very much for your review. As we always getKeyRow(id) before we getValueRow(id) with the same id, we don't retreive the keyRow from the batch but use the cached one. IMO, we can mark the valueRow as cached too because no action seems to overwritten it, then we'd rather use the cached valueRow than retrieve a new one .

@ooq
Copy link
Contributor

ooq commented Feb 14, 2017

@yaooqinn Do you have any benchmarks on the performance difference? I think pointTo() is pretty cheap. And does the patch pass the tests? I think valueRow is not updated correctly in your patch.

@maropu maropu mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2017
maropu added a commit to maropu/spark that referenced this pull request Apr 23, 2017
@asfgit asfgit closed this in e9f9715 Apr 24, 2017
peter-toth pushed a commit to peter-toth/spark that referenced this pull request Oct 6, 2018
This pr proposed to close stale PRs. Currently, we have 400+ open PRs and there are some stale PRs whose JIRA tickets have been already closed and whose JIRA tickets does not exist (also, they seem not to be minor issues).

// Open PRs whose JIRA tickets have been already closed
Closes apache#11785
Closes apache#13027
Closes apache#13614
Closes apache#13761
Closes apache#15197
Closes apache#14006
Closes apache#12576
Closes apache#15447
Closes apache#13259
Closes apache#15616
Closes apache#14473
Closes apache#16638
Closes apache#16146
Closes apache#17269
Closes apache#17313
Closes apache#17418
Closes apache#17485
Closes apache#17551
Closes apache#17463
Closes apache#17625

// Open PRs whose JIRA tickets does not exist and they are not minor issues
Closes apache#10739
Closes apache#15193
Closes apache#15344
Closes apache#14804
Closes apache#16993
Closes apache#17040
Closes apache#15180
Closes apache#17238

N/A

Author: Takeshi Yamamuro <yamamuro@apache.org>

Closes apache#17734 from maropu/resolved_pr.

Change-Id: Id2e590aa7283fe5ac01424d30a40df06da6098b5
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