[SPARK-54556][CORE] Rollback succeeding shuffle map stages when shuffle checksum mismatch detected #53274
Conversation
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
Contributor
Author
cloud-fan
reviewed
Dec 11, 2025
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/DAGScheduler.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
cloud-fan
reviewed
Dec 11, 2025
| * @return Shuffle map stages which need and can be rolled back | ||
| */ | ||
| private def abortStageWithInvalidRollBack(stagesToRollback: HashSet[Stage]): HashSet[Stage] = { | ||
| private def abortStagesUnableToRollback(stagesToRollback: HashSet[Stage]): HashSet[Stage] = { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
how about filterAndAbortUnrollbackableStages? It returns rollbackable stages which is like .filter.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good. Updated. Thanks.
cloud-fan
reviewed
Dec 11, 2025
| log"(${MDC(STAGE_ID, stage.id)}) were aborted so this stage is not needed anymore.") | ||
| return | ||
| } | ||
| if (!sms.shuffleDep.checksumMismatchFullRetryEnabled && stage.isIndeterminate) { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is it possible to merge the old indeterminate stage code path into the new framework? I think this is just a special case where we know checksum always mismatch.
Co-authored-by: Wenchen Fan <cloud0fan@gmail.com>
Contributor
Author
|
gentle ping @mridulm in case you missed this |
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Dec 16, 2025
Contributor
|
thanks, merging to master/4.1! |
cloud-fan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2025
…le checksum mismatch detected ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Rollback shuffle map stages when shuffle checksum mismatch detected: - cancel and resubmit the stage if it's running; - clean up the shuffle status to ensure it'll be resubmitted; - mark rollback attemptId and ignore the results from these elder attempts which may consume inconsistent data; ### Why are the changes needed? To ensure all the succeeding stages will be re-submitted and fully-retry when there is shuffle checksum mismatch detected. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? UT added. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes #53274 from ivoson/SPARK-54556. Authored-by: Tengfei Huang <tengfei.h@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com> (cherry picked from commit 0da9e05) Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Rollback shuffle map stages when shuffle checksum mismatch detected:
Why are the changes needed?
To ensure all the succeeding stages will be re-submitted and fully-retry when there is shuffle checksum mismatch detected.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
UT added.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No