-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 232
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
[REVIEW] Fixed failing cache tests #840
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Raza Jafri <rjafri@nvidia.com>
build |
It looks like there were a number of things that happened to the rebaseing code for 3.1 From what I can see I am also not sure what any of that has to do with the test that is doing a rollup. I am nervous on that one that we are just changing the test and end up hiding a real bug. |
I am OK with closing this if the CI isn't testing with 3.1.0. The sole reason for this PR is to make the build pass and triage #842 to investigate the bug? |
build |
Signed-off-by: Raza Jafri <rjafri@nvidia.com> Co-authored-by: Raza Jafri <rjafri@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Raza Jafri <rjafri@nvidia.com> Co-authored-by: Raza Jafri <rjafri@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Raza Jafri <rjafri@nvidia.com> Co-authored-by: Raza Jafri <rjafri@nvidia.com>
…IDIA#840) Signed-off-by: spark-rapids automation <70000568+nvauto@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: spark-rapids automation <70000568+nvauto@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Raza Jafri rjafri@nvidia.com
Fixed failing tests. There seems to be a change in 3.1.0 that is causing the Timestamp to go past or beyond the year 0 or 9999
The purpose of this test is to test GpuExpandExec which is still true. I have created a follow on issue to investigate the failure if deemed necessary #842. I think its a failure we have seen before w.r.t timestamps being represented in python