Skip to content

[SPARK-29203][SQL][TESTS][2.4] Reduce shuffle partitions in SQLQueryTestSuite #25938

Closed
wangyum wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:branch-2.4from
wangyum:SPARK-29203-branch-2.4
Closed

[SPARK-29203][SQL][TESTS][2.4] Reduce shuffle partitions in SQLQueryTestSuite #25938
wangyum wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:branch-2.4from
wangyum:SPARK-29203-branch-2.4

Conversation

@wangyum

@wangyum wangyum commented Sep 26, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

This PR backport #25891 to branch-2.4.

Why are the changes needed?

Reduce testing time.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Manually tested in my local:
Before:

...
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/in-joins.sql (6 minutes, 19 seconds)
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/not-in-joins.sql (2 minutes, 17 seconds)
[info] - subquery/scalar-subquery/scalar-subquery-predicate.sql (45 seconds, 763 milliseconds)
...
Run completed in 1 hour, 22 minutes.

After:

...
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/in-joins.sql (1 minute, 12 seconds)
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/not-in-joins.sql (27 seconds, 541 milliseconds)
[info] - subquery/scalar-subquery/scalar-subquery-predicate.sql (17 seconds, 360 milliseconds)
...
Run completed in 47 minutes.

@wangyum

wangyum commented Sep 26, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

cc @dongjoon-hyun

@HyukjinKwon HyukjinKwon left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM if tests pass

@SparkQA

SparkQA commented Sep 26, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Test build #111409 has finished for PR 25938 at commit 3054725.

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

wangyum added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2019
…estSuite

### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR backport #25891 to `branch-2.4`.

### Why are the changes needed?
Reduce testing time.

### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.

### How was this patch tested?

Manually tested in my local:
Before:
```
...
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/in-joins.sql (6 minutes, 19 seconds)
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/not-in-joins.sql (2 minutes, 17 seconds)
[info] - subquery/scalar-subquery/scalar-subquery-predicate.sql (45 seconds, 763 milliseconds)
...
Run completed in 1 hour, 22 minutes.
```
After:
```
...
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/in-joins.sql (1 minute, 12 seconds)
[info] - subquery/in-subquery/not-in-joins.sql (27 seconds, 541 milliseconds)
[info] - subquery/scalar-subquery/scalar-subquery-predicate.sql (17 seconds, 360 milliseconds)
...
Run completed in 47 minutes.

Closes #25938 from wangyum/SPARK-29203-branch-2.4.

Authored-by: Yuming Wang <yumwang@ebay.com>
Signed-off-by: Yuming Wang <wgyumg@gmail.com>
@wangyum

wangyum commented Sep 26, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Merged to branch-2.4.

@wangyum wangyum closed this Sep 26, 2019
@wangyum wangyum deleted the SPARK-29203-branch-2.4 branch September 26, 2019 11:34
@dongjoon-hyun

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thank you! Late LGTM.

private val inputFilePath = new File(baseResourcePath, "inputs").getAbsolutePath
private val goldenFilePath = new File(baseResourcePath, "results").getAbsolutePath

override def sparkConf: SparkConf = super.sparkConf

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This should be protected, right? In the parent trait SharedSparkSession, it is protected.

protected override def sparkConf ....

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done in #26019.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, seems adding a protected modifier is correct, though, we don't usually make separate PRs to address minor nits. Since the PR is open, I guess it's fine.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, copy that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants