[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3718?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16030539#comment-16030539 ]
TezQA commented on TEZ-3718: ---------------------------- {color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12870479/TEZ-3718.1.patch against master revision 241a7fa. {color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 3 new or modified test files. {color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. {color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. There were no new javadoc warning messages. {color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 3.0.1) warnings. {color:green}+1 release audit{color}. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings. {color:red}-1 core tests{color}. The patch failed these unit tests in : org.apache.tez.runtime.library.common.writers.TestUnorderedPartitionedKVWriter org.apache.tez.dag.app.TestMockDAGAppMaster Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-TEZ-Build/2491//testReport/ Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-TEZ-Build/2491//console This message is automatically generated. > Better handling of 'bad' nodes > ------------------------------ > > Key: TEZ-3718 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3718 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Siddharth Seth > Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3718.1.patch > > > At the moment, the default behaviour in case of a node being marked bad is to > do nothing other than not schedule new tasks on this node. > The alternate, via config, is to retroactively kill every task which ran on > the node, which causes far too many unnecessary re-runs. > Proposing the following changes. > 1. KILL fragments which are currently in the RUNNING state (instead of > relying on a timeout which leads to the attempt being marked as FAILED after > the timeout interval. > 2. Keep track of these failed nodes, and use this as input to the failure > heuristics. Normally source tasks require multiple consumers to report > failure for them to be marked as bad. If a single consumer reports failure > against a source which ran on a bad node, consider it bad and re-schedule > immediately. (Otherwise failures can take a while to propagate, and jobs get > a lot slower). > [~jlowe] - think you've looked at this in the past. Any thoughts/suggestions. > What I'm seeing is retroactive failures taking a long time to apply, and > restart sources which ran on a bad node. Also running tasks being counted as > FAILURES instead of KILLS. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)