[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24920?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16715209#comment-16715209
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on SPARK-24920:
----------------------------------------
AmplabJenkins removed a comment on issue #23278: [SPARK-24920][Core] Allow
sharing Netty's memory pool allocators
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23278#issuecomment-445905073
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
> Spark should allow sharing netty's memory pools across all uses
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-24920
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24920
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Spark Core
> Affects Versions: 2.4.0
> Reporter: Imran Rashid
> Priority: Major
> Labels: memory-analysis
>
> Spark currently creates separate netty memory pools for each of the following
> "services":
> 1) RPC Client
> 2) RPC Server
> 3) BlockTransfer Client
> 4) BlockTransfer Server
> 5) ExternalShuffle Client
> Depending on configuration and whether its an executor or driver JVM,
> different of these are active, but its always either 3 or 4.
> Having them independent somewhat defeats the purpose of using pools at all.
> In my experiments I've found each pool will grow due to a burst of activity
> in the related service (eg. task start / end msgs), followed another burst in
> a different service (eg. sending torrent broadcast blocks). Because of the
> way these pools work, they allocate memory in large chunks (16 MB by default)
> for each netty thread, so there is often a surge of 128 MB of allocated
> memory, even for really tiny messages. Also a lot of this memory is offheap
> by default, which makes it even tougher for users to manage.
> I think it would make more sense to combine all of these into a single pool.
> In some experiments I tried, this noticeably decreased memory usage, both
> onheap and offheap (no significant performance effect in my small
> experiments).
> As this is a pretty core change, as I first step I'd propose just exposing
> this as a conf, to let user experiment more broadly across a wider range of
> workloads
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org
