----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34541/#review84727 -----------------------------------------------------------
exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/ops/FragmentContext.java <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34541/#comment136065> Is there an alternative implementation? I feel like this method should not be part of FragmentContext. exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/ops/FragmentContext.java <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34541/#comment136067> Why a list? .contains(...) is linear time. exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/work/fragment/RootFragmentManager.java <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34541/#comment136071> Unnecessary "synchronized"? - Sudheesh Katkam On May 21, 2015, 4:30 p.m., abdelhakim deneche wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/34541/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 21, 2015, 4:30 p.m.) > > > Review request for drill, Chris Westin and Jacques Nadeau. > > > Bugs: DRILL-3147 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-3147 > > > Repository: drill-git > > > Description > ------- > > - FragmentContext.close() waits 100ms before closing the allocator to give > enough time to the rpc layer to properly release any batch that was just > transfered to this fragment's allocator > - each time a fragment A sends a "receiver finished" to fragment B, fragment > B id will be added to FragmentContext.ignoredSenders list > - refactored UnorderedReceiverBatch.informSenders() and > MergingRecordBatch.informSenders() by moving this method to FragmentContext > - DataServer.send() uses FragmentContext.ignoredSenders to decide if a batch > should be passed to the fragment or discarded right away > - BaseRawBatchBuffer methods enqueue() and kill() are now synchronized > - TestTpcdsSf1Leak test reproduces the leak, it's ignored by default because > it requires a large dataset > > > Diffs > ----- > > exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/ops/FragmentContext.java > 1cbe886 > > exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/physical/impl/mergereceiver/MergingRecordBatch.java > baf9bda > > exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/physical/impl/unorderedreceiver/UnorderedReceiverBatch.java > 684f715 > exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/rpc/data/DataServer.java > 80d2d6e > > exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/work/batch/BaseRawBatchBuffer.java > 11b6cc8 > > exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/work/fragment/RootFragmentManager.java > b770a33 > > exec/java-exec/src/test/java/org/apache/drill/exec/server/TestTpcdsSf1Leaks.java > PRE-CREATION > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34541/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > unit tests and tpch100 are passing. Couldn't run functional yet > > > Thanks, > > abdelhakim deneche > >
