[Spark-23306] Fix the oom caused by contention #20480
Closed
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
Member
|
Test build #86943 has finished for PR 20480 at commit
|
|
Test build #86944 has finished for PR 20480 at commit
|
jiangxb1987
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2018
Contributor
jiangxb1987
left a comment
jiangxb1987
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM this should be correct logically, and I can't think out a better way to resolve it. cc @cloud-fan
Contributor
|
thanks, merging to master! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
here is race condition in TaskMemoryManger, which may cause OOM.
The memory released may be taken by another task because there is a gap between releaseMemory and acquireMemory, e.g., UnifiedMemoryManager, causing the OOM. if the current is the only one that can perform spill. It can happen to BytesToBytesMap, as it only spill required bytes.
Loop on current consumer if it still has memory to release.
How was this patch tested?
The race contention is hard to reproduce, but the current logic seems causing the issue.
Please review http://spark.apache.org/contributing.html before opening a pull request.