spark-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Davidson <ilike...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [GitHub] incubator-spark pull request: SPARK-1078: Replace lift-json with j...
Date Wed, 12 Feb 2014 04:09:01 GMT
My apologies, my intention was that it is fine for the next minor
*or*major release, regardless of what comes next. I only wanted to
distinguish
that from the next maintenance release, since my understanding is that we
wish to avoid changing dependencies during maintenance releases.


On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Mark Hamstra <mark@clearstorydata.com>wrote:

> >
> > The situation sounds fine for the next minor release...
>
>
> I don't understand what you mean by this.  According to my current
> understanding, the next release of Spark other than maintenance releases on
> 0.9.x is intended to be a major release, 1.0.0, and there are no plans for
> an intervening minor release, which would be 0.10.0.  Thus "the next minor
> release" would be 1.1.0, and I fail to see why we would wait for that
> instead of putting the dependency change (assuming that it is something
> that we do, indeed, want) in 1.0.0.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:51 PM, aarondav <git@git.apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Github user aarondav commented on the pull request:
> >
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/582#issuecomment-34836430
> >
> >     Thanks for looking into it! The situation sounds fine for the next
> > minor release, and I don't think this patch needs to be included in the
> > next maintenance release anyway (following your very own [suggestion](
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spark-dev/201402.mbox/browser)
> > on the dev list).
> >
> >     While this patch looks good to me, I am not sure I fully understand
> > the need for it. I posted my question on the [dev list thread](
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spark-dev/201402.mbox/%3C945190638.685798.1391974088596.JavaMail.zimbra%40redhat.com%3E
> ).
> > Besides the dependency change, you also mention performance improvements.
> > [This benchmark](
> > http://engineering.ooyala.com/blog/comparing-scala-json-libraries) does
> > show Jackson outperforming lift on a particular workload, but do you have
> > another source showing how the relative performance changes with input
> size?
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message