TEZ-4061: InputAttemptIdentifier and CompositeInputAttemptIdentifier cannot be compared for equality #326
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
@abstractdog |
abstractdog
reviewed
Dec 21, 2024
| @@ -282,6 +282,7 @@ private void processShufflePayload(DataMovementEventPayloadProto shufflePayload, | |||
|
|
|||
| private void processInputFailedEvent(InputFailedEvent ife) { | |||
| InputAttemptIdentifier srcAttemptIdentifier = new InputAttemptIdentifier(ife.getTargetIndex(), ife.getVersion()); | |||
| LOG.info("Marking obsolete input: " + inputContext.getSourceVertexName() + " " + srcAttemptIdentifier); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please use {} formatting
abstractdog
reviewed
Dec 21, 2024
| @@ -50,6 +50,12 @@ public InputAttemptIdentifier expand(int inputIdentifierOffset) { | |||
| return new InputAttemptIdentifier(getInputIdentifier() + inputIdentifierOffset, getAttemptNumber(), getPathComponent(), isShared(), getFetchTypeInfo(), getSpillEventId()); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| public boolean include(int thatInputIdentifier, int thatAttemptNumber) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
few notes:
-
nit: this is more like "includes" because the method answers a question like whether this composite identifier includes another one, rather than taking and action
-
this method would be simpler with a single param:
includes(InputAttempIdentifier inputAttemptIdentifier)
- can you please add a method javadoc about what "includes" exactly means in this context
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree that includes is more appropriate for the method. I modified the signature of the method as well as its name, and attached a javadoc on top of it.
abstractdog
reviewed
Dec 21, 2024
| @@ -50,6 +50,12 @@ public InputAttemptIdentifier expand(int inputIdentifierOffset) { | |||
| return new InputAttemptIdentifier(getInputIdentifier() + inputIdentifierOffset, getAttemptNumber(), getPathComponent(), isShared(), getFetchTypeInfo(), getSpillEventId()); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| public boolean include(int thatInputIdentifier, int thatAttemptNumber) { | |||
| return | |||
| super.getInputIdentifier() <= thatInputIdentifier && thatInputIdentifier < (super.getInputIdentifier() + inputIdentifierCount) && | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can you reuse e.g. guava's Range for better readability?
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/range-class-guava-java/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, we can. Modified to use guava's Range.
abstractdog
reviewed
Dec 21, 2024
...library/src/main/java/org/apache/tez/runtime/library/common/shuffle/impl/ShuffleManager.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
abstractdog
reviewed
Dec 21, 2024
| } | ||
| // Avoid adding attempts which have been marked as OBSOLETE | ||
| if (isObsoleteInputAttemptIdentifier(input)) { | ||
| LOG.info("Skipping obsolete input: " + input); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the original behavior didn't log when we skip an obsolete input, is this an intentional change?
I can see that we still don't log anything in ShuffleScheduler when the same happens, so this is more like a LOG.debug, or back to
if (alreadyCompleted || isObsoleteInputAttemptIdentifier(input)) {
which one do you prefer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it would be better to synchronize the behaviour of ShuffleManager and ShuffleScheduler. Modified to use a single if clause.
|
thanks a lot for this patch @ngsg, sorry that we forgot about that |
|
@abstractdog , Thank you for your review. I’ve updated the patch to address your comments. Could you please review the changes? Thank you. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
thanks @ngsg for addressing the comments! I believe this is quite close to be merged |
|
@abstractdog , I've added a unit test that checks the boundary of the range inside |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
abstractdog
approved these changes
Dec 25, 2024
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.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-4061