Todd Lipcon has posted comments on this change. ( 
http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/12097 )

Change subject: IMPALA-7980: Fix spinning threads because of buggy handling of 
num_unqueued_files_.
......................................................................


Patch Set 2:

(10 comments)

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2//COMMIT_MSG
Commit Message:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2//COMMIT_MSG@19
PS2, Line 19: set to 1 initially; decrement at exit points of
            : IssueInitialRanges
that seems like the negation of what I'd expect given the name above?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2//COMMIT_MSG@21
PS2, Line 21: base-sequence-scanner.cc.
did you consider an approach like adding something like this to the top level 
base class:

virtual bool AllScanRangesIssued() = 0;

and then in parquet you can implement it as 'return 
initial_scan_ranges_issued_;'

and then all the fancy counter stuff can go into base-sequence-scanner.cc?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2//COMMIT_MSG@38
PS2, Line 38: ~30 threads to be spinning in the kernel. We were able to use 
perf to finda lot
typo


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2//COMMIT_MSG@74
PS2, Line 74: a an
typo


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.h
File be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.h@266
PS2, Line 266: Should
Must?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.h@277
PS2, Line 277: plugins
impala has plugins?

perhaps we can use [[deprecated]] or something here? ATTRIBUTE_DEPRECATED? (do 
we have that in impala's copy of gutil?)


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.h@287
PS2, Line 287:     no_more_add_disk_io_ranges_possible_.Add(delta);
can you DCHECK that the result doesn't go below zero?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.h@471
PS2, Line 471: no_more_add_disk_io_ranges_possible_
> I feel like this should be called more_add_disk_io_ranges_possible_, since
yea, I was also confused by the inverted naming here.

If we want to make this reflect its actual numeric value, maybe something like 
remaining_scan_range_addition_steps ? ie the Parquet scanner has one "scan 
range addition step" whereas the text ones have one such step per file? Or 
perhaps remaining_scan_range_issuances_?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.cc
File be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node-base.cc@453
PS2, Line 453:     UpdateNoMoreAddDiskIoRangesBarrier(-1);
is it important to not decrement this in the error cases below on line 471-494? 
ie why not just unconditionally decrement this, in the same way that you 
unconditionally set initial_ranges_issued_ = true on L448?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node.h
File be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/12097/2/be/src/exec/hdfs-scan-node.h@139
PS2, Line 139:
             :   /// Number of times scanner thread didn't find work to do.
             :   RuntimeProfile::Counter* 
scanner_thread_workless_loops_counter_ = nullptr;
hrm, I see the value of this for your test, but not entirely convinced it makes 
sense to keep around in profiles. Curious on others' opinions



--
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/12097
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-Project: Impala-ASF
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I133de13238d3d05c510e2ff771d48979125735b1
Gerrit-Change-Number: 12097
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Owner: Philip Zeyliger <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Impala Public Jenkins <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Joe McDonnell <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Michael Ho <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Philip Zeyliger <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tim Armstrong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Todd Lipcon <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:31:18 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes

Reply via email to