[SPARK-40778][CORE] Make HeartbeatReceiver as an IsolatedRpcEndpoint #38231
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
warrenzhu25
force-pushed
the
heartbeat
branch
from
6138bc6 to
f1dbd2a
Compare
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
Member
|
Gentle ping, @warrenzhu25 |
Contributor
Author
Thanks for gentle ping. Updated |
dongjoon-hyun
approved these changes
Oct 19, 2022
Member
|
cc @cloud-fan , too. |
cloud-fan
approved these changes
Oct 19, 2022
Contributor
|
cc @jiangxb1987 |
warrenzhu25
force-pushed
the
heartbeat
branch
from
9b0e62c to
0390cd9
Compare
mridulm
approved these changes
Oct 19, 2022
Member
|
Thank you, @warrenzhu25 , @mridulm , @cloud-fan . |
SandishKumarHN
pushed a commit
to SandishKumarHN/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2022
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Make HeartbeatReceiver as an IsolatedRpcEndpoint then it has dedicated single thread to process heartbeats. ### Why are the changes needed? All RpcEndpoint including HeartbeatReceiver in driver are sharing one thread pool. When there're lots of rpc messages queued, the waiting process time of heartbeat time could easily exceed heartbeat timeout, which generates lots of false positive. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? Manually tested. Closes apache#38231 from warrenzhu25/heartbeat. Authored-by: Warren Zhu <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
sunchao
pushed a commit
to sunchao/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2023
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Make HeartbeatReceiver as an IsolatedRpcEndpoint then it has dedicated single thread to process heartbeats. ### Why are the changes needed? All RpcEndpoint including HeartbeatReceiver in driver are sharing one thread pool. When there're lots of rpc messages queued, the waiting process time of heartbeat time could easily exceed heartbeat timeout, which generates lots of false positive. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? Manually tested. Closes apache#38231 from warrenzhu25/heartbeat. Authored-by: Warren Zhu <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit 89a3129) Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit 6fad2e1) Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
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?
Make HeartbeatReceiver as an IsolatedRpcEndpoint then it has dedicated single thread to process heartbeats.
Why are the changes needed?
All RpcEndpoint including HeartbeatReceiver in driver are sharing one thread pool. When there're lots of rpc messages queued, the waiting process time of heartbeat time could easily exceed heartbeat timeout, which generates lots of false positive.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Manually tested.