[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-11250?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17265922#comment-17265922
 ] 

Lance Dacey commented on ARROW-11250:
-------------------------------------

Do you have any idea at all what could also be causing my Airflow scheduler to 
take SO long to read the same dataset that I am able to read in under 10 
seconds on Jupyter? Could it be an overlay network or something? I have ensured 
that my tasks calling ds.dataset() are running on the same node that my 
Jupyterhub is running on. All software between the environments seems to be 
identical as well (same requirements.txt).

 

11 minutes on the latest airflow run and 9 seconds if I run it in a notebook.. 
is there a way to narrow down my troubleshooting scope for this?
{code:java}
dataset = ds.dataset(
 source=input_path,
 format="parquet",
 partitioning=partitioning,
 filesystem=fs,
 ){code}
 

> [Python] Inconsistent behavior calling ds.dataset()
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ARROW-11250
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-11250
>             Project: Apache Arrow
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Python
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.0
>         Environment: Ubuntu 18.04
> adal                      1.2.5              pyh9f0ad1d_0    conda-forge
> adlfs                     0.5.9              pyhd8ed1ab_0    conda-forge
> apache-airflow            1.10.14                  pypi_0    pypi
> azure-common              1.1.24                     py_0    conda-forge
> azure-core                1.9.0              pyhd3deb0d_0    conda-forge
> azure-datalake-store      0.0.51             pyh9f0ad1d_0    conda-forge
> azure-identity            1.5.0              pyhd8ed1ab_0    conda-forge
> azure-nspkg               3.0.2                      py_0    conda-forge
> azure-storage-blob        12.6.0             pyhd3deb0d_0    conda-forge
> azure-storage-common      2.1.0            py37hc8dfbb8_3    conda-forge
> fsspec                    0.8.5              pyhd8ed1ab_0    conda-forge
> jupyterlab_pygments       0.1.2              pyh9f0ad1d_0    conda-forge
> pandas                    1.2.0            py37ha9443f7_0
> pyarrow                   2.0.0           py37h4935f41_6_cpu    conda-forge
>            Reporter: Lance Dacey
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: azureblob, dataset,, python
>             Fix For: 4.0.0
>
>
> In a Jupyter notebook, I have noticed that sometimes I am not able to read a 
> dataset which certainly exists on Azure Blob.
>  
> {code:java}
> fs = fsspec.filesystem(protocol="abfs", account_name, account_key)
> {code}
>  
> One example of this is reading a dataset in one cell:
>  
> {code:java}
> ds.dataset("dev/test-split", partitioning="hive", filesystem=fs){code}
>  
> Then in another cell I try to read the same dataset:
>  
> {code:java}
> ds.dataset("dev/test-split", partitioning="hive", filesystem=fs)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> FileNotFoundError                         Traceback (most recent call last)
> <ipython-input-514-bf63585a0c1b> in <module>
> ----> 1 ds.dataset("dev/test-split", partitioning="hive", filesystem=fs)
> /opt/conda/lib/python3.8/site-packages/pyarrow/dataset.py in dataset(source, 
> schema, format, filesystem, partitioning, partition_base_dir, 
> exclude_invalid_files, ignore_prefixes)
>     669     # TODO(kszucs): support InMemoryDataset for a table input
>     670     if _is_path_like(source):
> --> 671         return _filesystem_dataset(source, **kwargs)
>     672     elif isinstance(source, (tuple, list)):
>     673         if all(_is_path_like(elem) for elem in source):
> /opt/conda/lib/python3.8/site-packages/pyarrow/dataset.py in 
> _filesystem_dataset(source, schema, filesystem, partitioning, format, 
> partition_base_dir, exclude_invalid_files, selector_ignore_prefixes)
>     426         fs, paths_or_selector = _ensure_multiple_sources(source, 
> filesystem)
>     427     else:
> --> 428         fs, paths_or_selector = _ensure_single_source(source, 
> filesystem)
>     429 
>     430     options = FileSystemFactoryOptions(
> /opt/conda/lib/python3.8/site-packages/pyarrow/dataset.py in 
> _ensure_single_source(path, filesystem)
>     402         paths_or_selector = [path]
>     403     else:
> --> 404         raise FileNotFoundError(path)
>     405 
>     406     return filesystem, paths_or_selector
> FileNotFoundError: dev/test-split
> {code}
>  
> If I reset the kernel, it works again. It also works if I change the path 
> slightly, like adding a "/" at the end (so basically it just not work if I 
> read the same dataset twice):
>  
> {code:java}
> ds.dataset("dev/test-split/", partitioning="hive", filesystem=fs)
> {code}
>  
>  
> The other strange behavior I have noticed that that if I read a dataset 
> inside of my Jupyter notebook,
>  
> {code:java}
> %%time
> dataset = ds.dataset("dev/test-split", 
> partitioning=ds.partitioning(pa.schema([("date", pa.date32())]), 
> flavor="hive"), 
> filesystem=fs,
> exclude_invalid_files=False)
> CPU times: user 1.98 s, sys: 0 ns, total: 1.98 s Wall time: 2.58 s{code}
>  
> Now, on the exact same server when I try to run the same code against the 
> same dataset in Airflow it takes over 3 minutes (comparing the timestamps in 
> my logs between right before I read the dataset, and immediately after the 
> dataset is available to filter):
> {code:java}
> [2021-01-14 03:52:04,011] INFO - Reading dev/test-split
> [2021-01-14 03:55:17,360] INFO - Processing dataset in batches
> {code}
> This is probably not a pyarrow issue, but what are some potential causes that 
> I can look into? I have one example where it is 9 seconds to read the dataset 
> in Jupyter, but then 11 *minutes* in Airflow. I don't know what to really 
> investigate - as I mentioned, the Jupyter notebook and Airflow are on the 
> same server and both are deployed using Docker. Airflow is using the 
> CeleryExecutor.
>  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to