You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@spark.apache.org by "Thomas Graves (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2021/02/18 15:00:21 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (SPARK-34461) Collect API feedback and maybe
revise some APIs
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-34461?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17286517#comment-17286517 ]
Thomas Graves commented on SPARK-34461:
---------------------------------------
So the discussions in the original SPIP and prs went back and forth a bit as to whether everything should be task/executor in the name or not. ie we could have had one class that just had a ton of functions that were all setExecutorX, setTaskX, etc. but we decided against that to separate it and hopefully make things more extendible.
I don't have super strong feelings but at the same time why require the extra characters to be typed? The resourceProfileBuilder is going to require a ResourceRequest.
I think it would be great to get more feedback from users before changing.
> Collect API feedback and maybe revise some APIs
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-34461
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-34461
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Spark Core
> Affects Versions: 3.2.0
> Reporter: wuyi
> Priority: Major
>
> For example,
> `ResourceProfileBuilder.require` uses the same API name for both task and executor. Probably it's better to distinguish them by differentiate the name, e.g., taskRequire / executorRequire
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@spark.apache.org