Skip to content
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

[FLINK-22050][network] Recycle all buffers before failing releaseAllBuffers #15440

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor

@rkhachatryan rkhachatryan commented Mar 30, 2021

What is the purpose of the change

Currently, BufferManager.releaseAllBuffers fails as soon as the recycling of the first buffer fails.
This is correct as it likely caused by programmer error.

However, this might cause resource leak and lead to subsequent test failures.

With this PR, it first tries to recycle all buffers and then throws exception if any.

(this is an independent improvement; not solving the original problem)

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
  • The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): no
  • The serializers: no
  • The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): no
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: no
  • The S3 file system connector: no

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? no

@rkhachatryan rkhachatryan marked this pull request as draft March 30, 2021 18:33
Copy link
Contributor

@AHeise AHeise left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for this fix. I think we should always try to do best effort resource freeing even with intermittent errors.
Since, we are not super performance-critical here, I'd suggest to use Guava's Closer instead since that handles suppression transparently.

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Mar 30, 2021

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 8641227 (Sat Aug 28 11:11:42 UTC 2021)

Warnings:

  • No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.

Review Progress

  • ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
  • ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
  • ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
  • ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
  • ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.


The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required Bot commands
The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

  • @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
  • @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
  • @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
  • @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
  • @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

@rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for quick review.
Good point about Closer, I'll use it.

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Mar 30, 2021

CI report:

Bot commands The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
  • @flinkbot run travis re-run the last Travis build
  • @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

@dawidwys
Copy link
Contributor

dawidwys commented Mar 30, 2021

I am always sceptical about using third party libraries, especially shaded ones if we have our own alternatives. Could we use CloseableRegistry instead of Closer?

@rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

One reason why CloseableRegistry isn't suitable is that it uses closeAllQuietly, i.e. error is not propagated.
IIRC, the consensus was that it's fine to use Closer.

@pnowojski
Copy link
Contributor

In the PR description it’s missing if it’s fixing the problem from the Jira ticket or not.

secondly please copy paste this description to the commit message as well.

@rkhachatryan rkhachatryan changed the title [FLINK-22050][network] Recycle all buffers before failing release [FLINK-22050][network] Recycle all buffers before failing releaseAllBuffers Mar 31, 2021
@rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

In the PR description it’s missing if it’s fixing the problem from the Jira ticket or not.
secondly please copy paste this description to the commit message as well.

Done

@rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

I had to revert back to try blocks (instead of Closer) as LIFO order is apparently important here.

Currently, BufferManager.releaseAllBuffers fails as soon as the recycling of the first buffer fails.
This is correct as it likely caused by programmer error.

However, this might cause resource leak and lead to subsequent test failures.

After this change, it first tries to recycle all buffers and then throws exception if any.
Copy link
Contributor

@AHeise AHeise left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Let's merge it when AZP agrees.

@rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for reviewing!
Merged into master as dd1d18794ce99ed5adec79a6a22c0a818258e4b3.

@rkhachatryan rkhachatryan deleted the f22050-tmp branch March 31, 2021 15:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
6 participants