[SPARK-54822][BUILD] Bump Parquet 1.17.0#53582
Closed
pan3793 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Closed
[SPARK-54822][BUILD] Bump Parquet 1.17.0#53582pan3793 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
pan3793 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
Member
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for testing this, @pan3793 . Could you make the CI happy to help Parquet 1.17.0?
Contributor
|
Thanks for the prompt reply @dongjoon-hyun It was my mistake, retriggering the CI should solve it 👍 |
Fokko
approved these changes
Jan 13, 2026
Contributor
Fokko
left a comment
Fokko
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The release is out: https://parquet.apache.org/blog/2026/01/13/1.17.0/
Member
Author
|
@Fokko thanks, I have removed the staging repo and rebase to fix the conflict |
JIRA Issue Information=== Improvement SPARK-54822 === This comment was automatically generated by GitHub Actions |
LuciferYang
approved these changes
Jan 14, 2026
dongjoon-hyun
approved these changes
Jan 14, 2026
Member
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
dongjoon-hyun
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1, LGTM. Thank you, @pan3793 , @Fokko , and @LuciferYang .
Merged to master for Apache Sprak 4.2.0.
dongjoon-hyun
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2026
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to regenerate benchmark results to check the intermediate status as a part of Apache Spark 4.2.0 preparation. Please note that `V2FunctionBenchmark` is excluded because it's broken due to `NumericEvalContext.evalMode()` error currently. It's good to identify this kind of bug as early as possible via this PR. - [SPARK-55519 `V2FunctionBenchmark` is broken](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-55519) ### Why are the changes needed? Apache Spark 4.2.0 introduced many improvements on top of the key dependency differences from Spark 4.1.0: - #53396 - #53582 - #53347 - #54233 - #54292 We updated the benchmark result 4 months ago. So, it's time to make them up-to-date with our actual code and the current infra. - #52600 ``` - OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 17.0.16+8-LTS on Linux 6.11.0-1018-azure + OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 17.0.18+8-LTS on Linux 6.14.0-1017-azure ``` ``` - OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 21.0.8+9-LTS on Linux 6.11.0-1018-azure + OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 21.0.10+7-LTS on Linux 6.14.0-1017-azure ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No. This is a change on benchmark result files. ### How was this patch tested? Manual review. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes #54313 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-55520. Lead-authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: dongjoon-hyun <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
rpnkv
pushed a commit
to rpnkv/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 18, 2026
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to regenerate benchmark results to check the intermediate status as a part of Apache Spark 4.2.0 preparation. Please note that `V2FunctionBenchmark` is excluded because it's broken due to `NumericEvalContext.evalMode()` error currently. It's good to identify this kind of bug as early as possible via this PR. - [SPARK-55519 `V2FunctionBenchmark` is broken](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-55519) ### Why are the changes needed? Apache Spark 4.2.0 introduced many improvements on top of the key dependency differences from Spark 4.1.0: - apache#53396 - apache#53582 - apache#53347 - apache#54233 - apache#54292 We updated the benchmark result 4 months ago. So, it's time to make them up-to-date with our actual code and the current infra. - apache#52600 ``` - OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 17.0.16+8-LTS on Linux 6.11.0-1018-azure + OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 17.0.18+8-LTS on Linux 6.14.0-1017-azure ``` ``` - OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 21.0.8+9-LTS on Linux 6.11.0-1018-azure + OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 21.0.10+7-LTS on Linux 6.14.0-1017-azure ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No. This is a change on benchmark result files. ### How was this patch tested? Manual review. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes apache#54313 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-55520. Lead-authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: dongjoon-hyun <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Parquet Java 1.17.0 Release Notes
https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/releases/tag/apache-parquet-1.17.0
Note, this is the first version that requires Java 11+ (instead of Java 8)
Why are the changes needed?
Keep Parquet up-to-date.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Pass GHA.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.