fix derived feature list toMap will change the original order - #1209
Open
gglilang wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
fix derived feature list toMap will change the original order#1209gglilang wants to merge 1 commit into
gglilang wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Sorry, something went wrong.
xiaoyongzhu
approved these changes
Sep 7, 2023
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Description
When derived features also depend on some derived features, these features are in order at the same stage, but after toMap, the order will be disrupted, causing an exception to be thrown
Exception in thread "main" com.linkedin.feathr.exception.FeathrException: [FEATHR_ERROR] Error when processing derived feature feature1. Requires following features to be generated [base_feature1], but found [base_feature2, base_feature3]
How was this PR tested?
Does this PR introduce any user-facing changes?