[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3998?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16684583#comment-16684583
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on TEZ-3998:
-------------------------------------
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.
> Allow CONCURRENT edge property in DAG construction and introduce
> ConcurrentSchedulingType
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TEZ-3998
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3998
> Project: Apache Tez
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Yingda Chen
> Assignee: Yingda Chen
> Priority: Major
>
> This is the first task related to TEZ-3997
>
> |Note: There is no API change in this proposed change. The majority of this
> change will be lifting some existing constraints against CONCURRENT edge
> type, and addition of a VertexMangerPlugin implementation.|
>
> This includes enabling the CONCURRENT SchedulingType as a valid edge
> property, by removing all the sanity check against CONCURRENT during DAG
> construction/execution. A new VertexManagerPlugin (namely
> VertexManagerWithConcurrentInput) will be implemented for vertex with
> incoming concurrent edge(s).
> In addition, we will assume in this change that
> * A vertex *cannot* have both SEQUENTIAL and CONCURRENT incoming edges
> * No shuffle or data movement is handled by Tez framework when two vertices
> are connected through a CONCURRENT edge. Instead, runtime should be
> responsible for handling all the data-plane communications (as proposed in
> [1]).
> Note that the above assumptions are common for scenarios such as whole-DAG or
> sub-graph gang scheduling, but they may be relaxed in later implementation,
> which may allow mixture of SEQUENTIAL and CONCURRENT edges on the same vertex.
>
> Most of the (meaningful) scheduling decisions today in Tez are made based on
> the notion of (or an extended version of) source task completion. This will
> no longer be true in presence of CONCURRENT edge. Instead, events such as
> source vertex configured, or source task running will become more relevant
> when making scheduling decision for two vertices connected via a CONCURRENT
> edge. We therefore introduce a new enum *ConcurrentSchedulingType* to
> describe the “scheduling timing” for the downstream vertex in such scenarios.
> |public enum ConcurrentSchedulingType{
> /** * trigger downstream vertex tasks scheduling by "configured" event of
> upstream vertices */
> SOURCE_VERTEX_CONFIGURED,
> /** * trigger downstream vertex tasks scheduling by "running" event of
> upstream tasks */
> SOURCE_TASK_STARTED
> }|
>
> Note that in this change, we will only use SOURCE_VERTEX_CONFIGURED as the
> scheduling type, which suffice for scenarios of whole-DAG or sub-graph
> gang-scheduling, where we want (all the tasks in) the downstream vertex to be
> scheduled together with (all the tasks) in the upstream vertex. In this case,
> we can leverage the existing onVertexStateUpdated() interface of
> VextexMangerPlugin to collect relevant information to assist the scheduling
> decision, and *there is no additional API change necessary*. However, in more
> subtle case such as the parameter-server example described in Fig. 1, other
> scheduling type would be more relevant, therefore the placeholder for
> *ConcurrentSchedulingType* will be introduced in this change as part of the
> infrastructure work.
>
> Finally, since we assume that all communications between two vertices
> connected via CONCURRENT edge are handled by application runtime, a
> CONCURRENT edge will be assigned a DummyEdgeManager that basically mute all
> DME/VME handling.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
