-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.2k
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
[SPARK-10790][YARN] Fix initial executor number not set issue and consolidate the codes #8910
Conversation
Test build #42987 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
@@ -314,5 +314,28 @@ object YarnSparkHadoopUtil { | |||
def getClassPathSeparator(): String = { | |||
classPathSeparatorField.get(null).asInstanceOf[String] | |||
} | |||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The refactoring is nice. This is a reasonable place for this code now, though eventually it may not be YARN-specific?
Thanks @srowen for your review, I've updated the codes according to your comments. |
@@ -314,5 +314,28 @@ object YarnSparkHadoopUtil { | |||
def getClassPathSeparator(): String = { | |||
classPathSeparatorField.get(null).asInstanceOf[String] | |||
} | |||
|
|||
/** Get the initial target number of executors depends on dynamic allocation is enabled or not */ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: "Getting the initial target number of executors depends on whether dynamic allocation is enabled."
LGTM pending a couple of minor changes. |
Test build #43027 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
Test build #43030 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
retest this please |
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.util.ConverterUtils | |||
import org.apache.spark.deploy.SparkHadoopUtil | |||
import org.apache.spark.launcher.YarnCommandBuilderUtils | |||
import org.apache.spark.{SecurityManager, SparkConf, SparkException} | |||
import org.apache.spark.util.Utils | |||
import org.apache.spark.util.{IntParam, Utils} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
not necessary anymore?
Test build #43032 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
Test build #43033 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
Jenkins, retest this please. |
Test build #43042 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
Looks like some other patches introduce this mima failures. |
Test build #1818 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
Jenkins, retest this please. |
Test build #43056 has finished for PR 8910 at commit
|
LGTM, merging to master and branch-1.5. |
…nsolidate the codes This bug is introduced in [SPARK-9092](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-9092), `targetExecutorNumber` should use `minExecutors` if `initialExecutors` is not set. Using 0 instead will meet the problem as mentioned in [SPARK-10790](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-10790). Also consolidate and simplify some similar code snippets to keep the consistent semantics. Author: jerryshao <sshao@hortonworks.com> Closes #8910 from jerryshao/SPARK-10790. (cherry picked from commit 353c30b) Signed-off-by: Marcelo Vanzin <vanzin@cloudera.com>
…nsolidate the codes This bug is introduced in [SPARK-9092](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-9092), `targetExecutorNumber` should use `minExecutors` if `initialExecutors` is not set. Using 0 instead will meet the problem as mentioned in [SPARK-10790](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-10790). Also consolidate and simplify some similar code snippets to keep the consistent semantics. Author: jerryshao <sshao@hortonworks.com> Closes apache#8910 from jerryshao/SPARK-10790. (cherry picked from commit 353c30b) Signed-off-by: Marcelo Vanzin <vanzin@cloudera.com> (cherry picked from commit de25931)
This bug is introduced in SPARK-9092,
targetExecutorNumber
should useminExecutors
ifinitialExecutors
is not set. Using 0 instead will meet the problem as mentioned in SPARK-10790.Also consolidate and simplify some similar code snippets to keep the consistent semantics.