[SPARK-41853] [CORE] Use Map in place of SortedMap for ErrorClassesJsonReader #39351
Conversation
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
Contributor
Author
tedyu
changed the title
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Jan 3, 2023
LuciferYang
reviewed
Jan 3, 2023
| .build() | ||
| private def readAsMap(url: URL): SortedMap[String, ErrorInfo] = { | ||
| val map = mapper.readValue(url, new TypeReference[SortedMap[String, ErrorInfo]]() {}) | ||
| private def readAsMap(url: URL): Map[String, ErrorInfo] = { |
MaxGekk
approved these changes
Jan 3, 2023
Member
|
Merged to master |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
The use of
SortedMapinErrorClassesJsonReaderwas mostly for making tests easier to write.This PR replaces
SortedMapwithMapsinceSortedMapis slower compared toMapWhy are the changes needed?
SortedMapis slower compared toMapDoes this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Existing test suite.