Github user beltran commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/tez/pull/33#discussion_r232864378
--- Diff:
tez-runtime-library/src/main/java/org/apache/tez/dag/library/vertexmanager/VertexManagerWithConcurrentInput.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,242 @@
+/**
+ * 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.tez.dag.library.vertexmanager;
+
+import com.google.common.base.Preconditions;
+import com.google.common.collect.Lists;
+import com.google.common.collect.Maps;
+import org.apache.hadoop.conf.Configuration;
+import org.apache.tez.common.TezUtils;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.EdgeProperty;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.EdgeProperty.ConcurrentEdgeTriggerType;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.InputDescriptor;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.TezConfiguration;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.TezUncheckedException;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.VertexManagerPlugin;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.VertexManagerPluginContext;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.VertexManagerPluginDescriptor;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.event.VertexState;
+import org.apache.tez.dag.api.event.VertexStateUpdate;
+import org.apache.tez.runtime.api.Event;
+import org.apache.tez.runtime.api.TaskAttemptIdentifier;
+import org.apache.tez.runtime.api.events.VertexManagerEvent;
+import org.slf4j.Logger;
+import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
+
+import javax.annotation.Nullable;
+import java.io.IOException;
+import java.util.EnumSet;
+import java.util.List;
+import java.util.Map;
+import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean;
+
+import static
org.apache.tez.dag.api.EdgeProperty.SchedulingType.CONCURRENT;
+
+public class VertexManagerWithConcurrentInput extends VertexManagerPlugin {
+
+ private static final Logger LOG =
LoggerFactory.getLogger(VertexManagerWithConcurrentInput.class);
+
+ private final Map<String, Boolean> srcVerticesConfigured =
Maps.newConcurrentMap();
+ private int managedTasks;
+ private boolean tasksScheduled = false;
+ private AtomicBoolean onVertexStartedDone = new AtomicBoolean(false);
+ private Configuration vertexConfig;
+ private String vertexName;
+ private ConcurrentEdgeTriggerType edgeTriggerType;
+ private boolean allSrcVerticesConfigured;
+
+ int completedUpstreamTasks;
+
+ public VertexManagerWithConcurrentInput(VertexManagerPluginContext
context) {
+ super(context);
+ }
+
+ @Override
+ public void initialize() {
+ if (getContext().getUserPayload() == null) {
+ throw new TezUncheckedException("user payload cannot be null for
VertexManagerWithConcurrentInput");
+ }
+ managedTasks =
getContext().getVertexNumTasks(getContext().getVertexName());
+ Map<String, EdgeProperty> edges =
getContext().getInputVertexEdgeProperties();
+ for (Map.Entry<String, EdgeProperty> entry : edges.entrySet()) {
+ if (!CONCURRENT.equals(entry.getValue().getSchedulingType())) {
+ throw new TezUncheckedException("All input edges to vertex " +
vertexName +
+ " must be CONCURRENT.");
+ }
+ String srcVertex = entry.getKey();
+ srcVerticesConfigured.put(srcVertex, false);
+ getContext().registerForVertexStateUpdates(srcVertex,
EnumSet.of(VertexState.CONFIGURED));
+ }
+
+ try {
+ vertexConfig =
TezUtils.createConfFromUserPayload(getContext().getUserPayload());
+ } catch (IOException e) {
+ throw new TezUncheckedException(e);
+ }
+ edgeTriggerType = ConcurrentEdgeTriggerType.valueOf(
+ vertexConfig.get(TezConfiguration.TEZ_CONCURRENT_EDGE_TRIGGER_TYPE,
+ TezConfiguration.TEZ_CONCURRENT_EDGE_TRIGGER_TYPE_DEFAULT));
+ if
(!ConcurrentEdgeTriggerType.SOURCE_VERTEX_CONFIGURED.equals(edgeTriggerType)) {
+ // pending TEZ-3999
+ throw new TezUncheckedException("Only support
SOURCE_VERTEX_CONFIGURED triggering type for now.");
+ }
+ LOG.info("VertexManagerWithConcurrentInput initialized with
edgeTriggerType {}.", edgeTriggerType);
+
+ vertexName = getContext().getVertexName();
+ completedUpstreamTasks = 0;
+ }
+
+ @Override
+ public void onVertexStarted(List<TaskAttemptIdentifier> completions) {
+ onVertexStartedDone.set(true);
+ scheduleTasks();
+ }
+
+ @Override
+ public void onVertexStateUpdated(VertexStateUpdate stateUpdate) {
+ VertexState state = stateUpdate.getVertexState();
+ String fromVertex = stateUpdate.getVertexName();
+ if (!srcVerticesConfigured.containsKey(fromVertex)) {
+ throw new IllegalArgumentException("Not expecting state update from
vertex:" +
+ fromVertex + " in vertex: " + this.vertexName);
+ }
+
+ if (!VertexState.CONFIGURED.equals(state)) {
+ throw new IllegalArgumentException("Received incorrect state
notification : " +
+ state + " from vertex: " + fromVertex + " in vertex: " +
this.vertexName);
+ }
+
+ LOG.info("Received configured notification: " + state + " for vertex: "
+ + fromVertex + " in vertex: " + this.vertexName);
+ srcVerticesConfigured.put(fromVertex, true);
+
+ // check for source vertices completely configured
+ boolean checkAllSrcVerticesConfigured = true;
+ for (Map.Entry<String, Boolean> entry :
srcVerticesConfigured.entrySet()) {
+ if (!entry.getValue()) {
+ // vertex not configured
+ LOG.info("Waiting for vertex {} in vertex {} ", entry.getKey(),
this.vertexName);
+ checkAllSrcVerticesConfigured = false;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ allSrcVerticesConfigured = checkAllSrcVerticesConfigured;
--- End diff --
I don't think it's necessary to synchronize all the methods and that would
unnecessarily slow this down when an `AtomicBoolean` to guard
`getContext().scheduleTasks(tasksToStart)` would be enough IMO.
This does solve the bug though so I'd be happy to create a follow up ticket
to address this and let this go in how it is in this PR. Maybe we can look into
this again when we see the whole picture when the other tickets implemented.
---
