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-25311][core] Fix deal with delimited compressed file not correctly #18299

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

TJX2014
Copy link

@TJX2014 TJX2014 commented Jan 7, 2022

What is the purpose of the change

This pull request fix the issue about DelimitedInputFormat can not deal with compressed file correctly

Brief change log

The splitLength should be set to -1 to read whole split for compressed file

Verifying this change

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
Add test that compressed file can be deal with correctly by org.apache.flink.api.common.io.DelimitedInputFormat

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, ZooKeeper: (no)
  • The S3 file system connector: (no)

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no)

@TJX2014
Copy link
Author

TJX2014 commented Jan 7, 2022

hi @Airblader , I have reword the commit to fix the issue from #18273,
please help me review the PR.

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Jan 7, 2022

CI report:

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

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Jan 7, 2022

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 bc77691 (Fri Jan 07 11:30:32 UTC 2022)

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

@TJX2014
Copy link
Author

TJX2014 commented Jan 12, 2022

@AHeise could you check, is falling but with things not related to this PR

@TJX2014
Copy link
Author

TJX2014 commented Jan 13, 2022

hi @zentol, could you please help me review the PR
: )

@TJX2014
Copy link
Author

TJX2014 commented Jan 13, 2022

hi @fapaul, could you please help me review the PR
: )

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 very much for your patience and finding the bug. Please have a look at my proposed fix.

Comment on lines +902 to +903
// compressed format should use splitLength specially
this.splitLength = -1;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This fix looks odd to me. First, we are modifying a parameter, which is always a sign that this should go to call site. Second, here at this point, I cannot see that we are guaranteed to not have 2 splits on the same file and reading duplicate data if we simply change splitLength here. Third, this should probably use READ_WHOLE_SPLIT_FLAG.
All in all the proper place to fix it is in createInputSplits.

The actual bug is in

        if (unsplittable) { // should be testForUnsplittable(file)
            int splitNum = 0;
            for (final FileStatus file : files) {
                final FileSystem fs = file.getPath().getFileSystem();
                final BlockLocation[] blocks = fs.getFileBlockLocations(file, 0, file.getLen());
                Set<String> hosts = new HashSet<String>();
                for (BlockLocation block : blocks) {
                    hosts.addAll(Arrays.asList(block.getHosts()));
                }
                long len = file.getLen();
                if (testForUnsplittable(file)) { // this doesn't make any sense at this point
                    len = READ_WHOLE_SPLIT_FLAG;
                }
                FileInputSplit fis =
                        new FileInputSplit(
                                splitNum++,
                                file.getPath(),
                                0,
                                len,
                                hosts.toArray(new String[hosts.size()]));
                inputSplits.add(fis);
            }
            return inputSplits.toArray(new FileInputSplit[inputSplits.size()]);
        }

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants