Hi again, On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Tobias Pfeiffer <[email protected]> wrote:
> If you think of > items.map(x => /* throw exception */).count() > then even though the count you want to get does not necessarily require > the evaluation of the function in map() (i.e., the number is the same), you > may not want to get the count if that code actually fails. > Sorry, I think that was a bit confusing. What I mean is: You have to compute the whole RDD in order to give a meaningful count() result (whether you use rdd.count() or the mapPartitions() approach). Tobias
