hudi-agent commented on code in PR #19033:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/19033#discussion_r3710168826


##########
hudi-sync/hudi-hive-sync/src/main/java/org/apache/hudi/hive/util/ParallelDispatch.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,267 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *      http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.hudi.hive.util;
+
+import org.apache.hudi.common.util.VisibleForTesting;
+
+import java.util.ArrayList;
+import java.util.List;
+import java.util.concurrent.Callable;
+import java.util.concurrent.CancellationException;
+import java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch;
+import java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException;
+import java.util.concurrent.Future;
+import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean;
+import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger;
+import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicReference;
+
+/**
+ * Handle to one fan-out batch of partition work: the submitted futures plus 
the shared
+ * abort flag the tasks consult before running.
+ *
+ * <p>The abort flag exists because waiting on futures in <i>submission</i> 
order is not
+ * enough to stop queued work. If a later task fails quickly while an earlier 
one is slow,
+ * the awaiting thread is still parked on the earlier {@code Future.get()}, 
and the
+ * executor happily keeps starting every queued task in the meantime. By the 
time the
+ * failure is observed, most of the "not-yet-started" work has already run.
+ *
+ * <p>Two mechanisms fix that, and both are needed:
+ * <ul>
+ *   <li>a {@link CountDownLatch} tripped by the <i>first</i> abort, so the 
awaiting
+ *       thread wakes on failure rather than on its turn in submission 
order;</li>
+ *   <li>a task-side {@link #aborted()} check on entry, because cancelling 
from the
+ *       awaiting thread is inherently late — a worker can pull its next task 
off the
+ *       queue at any moment.</li>
+ * </ul>
+ *
+ * <p>The failing task also records its own throwable as it aborts, so the 
reported root
+ * cause is the failure that stopped the batch. Picking the error by scanning 
futures in
+ * submission order would instead surface whichever failure happens to sit 
earliest in the
+ * list, which is not necessarily the one that aborted the run.
+ *
+ * <p>Shared by {@link HiveDriverPool} (Hive {@code Driver} statements) and
+ * {@link IMetaStoreClientPool} (Thrift {@code dropPartition} batches), which 
fan out over
+ * different execution models but need identical abort-on-first-error 
semantics.
+ */
+public final class ParallelDispatch {
+
+  private final List<Future<?>> futures;
+  private final int total;
+  private final AtomicInteger settled = new AtomicInteger(0);
+  private final AtomicBoolean aborted = new AtomicBoolean(false);
+  private final AtomicReference<Throwable> abortCause = new 
AtomicReference<>();
+  private final CountDownLatch done = new CountDownLatch(1);
+  private volatile boolean sealed;
+
+  ParallelDispatch(int total) {
+    this.total = total;
+    this.futures = new ArrayList<>(total);
+  }
+
+  void add(Future<?> future) {
+    futures.add(future);
+  }
+
+  // Called once submission finishes. A task that settles before the last 
submit
+  // would otherwise see settled < total and never trip the latch, so re-check 
here.
+  void sealed() {
+    sealed = true;
+    signalIfComplete();
+  }
+
+  boolean aborted() {
+    return aborted.get();
+  }
+
+  void abort() {
+    aborted.set(true);
+    done.countDown();
+  }
+
+  // Records the failure that triggered the abort, first writer wins. 
Selecting the error
+  // by walking futures in submission order instead would report whichever 
failure sits
+  // earliest in the list, not the one that actually stopped the batch: a fast 
failure at
+  // index 1 aborts the run, and a slow index 0 that fails later would take 
its place.
+  void abort(Throwable cause) {
+    abortCause.compareAndSet(null, cause);
+    abort();
+  }
+
+  void taskSettled() {
+    settled.incrementAndGet();
+    signalIfComplete();
+  }
+
+  private void signalIfComplete() {
+    if (sealed && settled.get() >= total) {
+      done.countDown();
+    }
+  }
+
+  void awaitSettledOrAborted() {
+    if (total == 0) {
+      return;
+    }
+    try {
+      done.await();
+    } catch (InterruptedException ie) {
+      Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
+      aborted.set(true);
+    }
+  }
+
+  // mayInterruptIfRunning=false: a worker may be mid-statement against a Hive 
Driver or
+  // a Thrift client, and we don't want to tear that down partway. Cancel only 
tasks that
+  // haven't started; in-flight work runs to completion.
+  int cancelPending() {
+    int cancelled = 0;
+    for (Future<?> f : futures) {
+      if (f.cancel(false)) {
+        cancelled++;
+      }
+    }
+    return cancelled;
+  }
+
+  List<Future<?>> futures() {
+    return futures;
+  }
+
+  /**
+   * Wraps {@code body} so it observes this batch's abort flag: it skips 
itself if a
+   * sibling has already failed, trips the flag if it fails, and always 
records that it
+   * settled so the awaiting thread can be released.
+   */
+  Callable<Void> guard(Callable<Void> body, String skipMessage) {
+    return () -> {
+      if (aborted()) {
+        throw new CancellationException(skipMessage);
+      }
+      try {
+        return body.call();
+      } catch (Throwable t) {
+        abort(t);
+        throw t;
+      } finally {
+        taskSettled();
+      }
+    };
+  }
+
+  /**
+   * Waits for the batch to settle (or abort), cancels whatever had not 
started, and
+   * returns the outcome. Errors are observed in <i>completion</i> order, not 
submission
+   * order, so a failure on a fast worker stops the other queues even while a 
slow worker
+   * is still mid-statement.
+   */
+  Outcome awaitOutcome() {
+    awaitSettledOrAborted();
+    int cancelled = cancelPending();
+
+    // Seeded from the task that tripped the abort, so the reported root cause 
is the
+    // failure that actually stopped the batch rather than the lowest-indexed 
one.
+    Exception firstError = asException(abortCause.get());
+    int completed = 0;
+    List<Exception> suppressed = new ArrayList<>();
+    for (Future<?> f : futures) {
+      try {
+        f.get();
+        completed++;
+      } catch (CancellationException ce) {
+        // Either we cancelled it before it started, or the task itself 
observed the
+        // abort flag and bailed. Not a new failure; just note it for the 
summary.
+        cancelled++;
+      } catch (InterruptedException ie) {
+        Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
+        if (firstError == null) {
+          firstError = ie;
+        }
+      } catch (ExecutionException ee) {
+        Exception cause = unwrap(ee);
+        if (cause instanceof CancellationException) {
+          cancelled++;
+        } else if (firstError == null) {
+          firstError = cause;
+        } else if (cause != firstError) {

Review Comment:
   🤖 Nice fix on seeding the root cause. One gap: the identity guard here only 
holds when the aborting task threw an `Exception`. `guard` catches `Throwable` 
(line 158), so if a task throws an `Error`, `asException()` (line 215) wraps it 
in a *new* `RuntimeException` as `firstError`, while `unwrap(ee)` returns the 
`ExecutionException` (an `Error` isn't an `Exception`) — so `cause != 
firstError` is true and that same root failure also lands in `suppressed`, i.e. 
reported twice. Is the non-Exception case worth handling, or are `Error`s 
considered out of scope here?
   
   <sub><i>⚠️ AI-generated; verify before applying. React 👍/👎 to flag 
quality.</i></sub>



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to