-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 264
chore: Update for 0.3.0 release, prepare for 0.4.0 development #970
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
Conversation
parthchandra
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
Do you have automation to change the version everywhere or is it mostly a manual search and replace?
It is all manual at this point. It would be good to start automating this. |
kazuyukitanimura
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just one minor comment
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #970 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 34.03% 34.23% +0.20%
- Complexity 875 886 +11
============================================
Files 112 112
Lines 43289 43369 +80
Branches 9572 9609 +37
============================================
+ Hits 14734 14848 +114
+ Misses 25521 25475 -46
- Partials 3034 3046 +12
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
## Which issue does this PR close? <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> Closes #. ## Rationale for this change <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> ## What changes are included in this PR? <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> ``` cb3e977 perf: Add experimental feature to replace SortMergeJoin with ShuffledHashJoin (apache#1007) 3df9d5c fix: Make comet-git-info.properties optional (apache#1027) 4033687 chore: Reserve memory for native shuffle writer per partition (apache#1022) bd541d6 (public/main) remove hard-coded version number from Dockerfile (apache#1025) e3ac6cf feat: Implement bloom_filter_agg (apache#987) 8d097d5 (origin/main) chore: Revert "chore: Reserve memory for native shuffle writer per partition (apache#988)" (apache#1020) 591f45a chore: Bump arrow-rs to 53.1.0 and datafusion (apache#1001) e146cfa chore: Reserve memory for native shuffle writer per partition (apache#988) abd9f85 fix: Fallback to Spark if named_struct contains duplicate field names (apache#1016) 22613e9 remove legacy comet-spark-shell (apache#1013) d40c802 clarify that Maven central only has jars for Linux (apache#1009) 837c256 docs: Various documentation improvements (apache#1005) 0667c60 chore: Make parquet reader options Comet options instead of Hadoop options (apache#968) 0028f1e fix: Fallback to Spark if scan has meta columns (apache#997) b131cc3 feat: Support `GetArrayStructFields` expression (apache#993) 3413397 docs: Update tuning guide (apache#995) afd28b9 Quality of life fixes for easier hacking (apache#982) 18150fb chore: Don't transform the HashAggregate to CometHashAggregate if Comet shuffle is disabled (apache#991) a1599e2 chore: Update for 0.3.0 release, prepare for 0.4.0 development (apache#970) ``` ## How are these changes tested? <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? -->
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #.
Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
How are these changes tested?