Bharath Vissapragada has posted comments on this change. Change subject: IMPALA-1972/IMPALA-3882: Fix client_request_state_map_lock_ contention ......................................................................
Patch Set 7: (8 comments) The new test fails deterministically without the patch when run locally. http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/6707/7/be/src/service/impala-beeswax-server.cc File be/src/service/impala-beeswax-server.cc: PS7, Line 296: NULL > nit: change that one too to at least keep functions consistent Done http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/6707/7/be/src/service/impala-http-handler.cc File be/src/service/impala-http-handler.cc: PS7, Line 721: just return > that's not what the code does (it also sets plan_metadata_unavailable), ple Done PS7, Line 730: adopt_lock_t > shouldn't that be deleted? Oops, missed that during rebase. http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/6707/7/be/src/service/impala-server.cc File be/src/service/impala-server.cc: Line 836: #endif > actually, how about moving this to before UpdateQueryStatus() since that mo Done http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/6707/7/tests/custom_cluster/test_query_concurrency.py File tests/custom_cluster/test_query_concurrency.py: PS7, Line 32: The intention here is to check contention on the query_exec_state_map_lock_ > This is talking about how the old code worked, which won't make sense to pe Rephrased. PS7, Line 54: This creates lock contention on the coordinator by : calling QuerySummaryHandler() method > This is no longer true with your fix. How about saying: Yea it doesn't make sense to someone reading it with the fix. . IMO, the test class comment conveys the intention already and this specific comment looks redundant. Removed it, please let me know if you disagree. PS7, Line 74: time.sleep(2) > I'm worried that this will be flaky, especially with ASAN. Instead of this Yep good idea to reduce flakiness. But I don't think passing a large value to get_inflight_queries() would achieve that since the /inflight_queries end point never times out. Instead we should repeatedly poll that page in loop with timeout. Redid the logic accordingly. PS7, Line 83: time.sleep(2) > this delay is a bit harder to eliminate. How about we increase --stress_me Same comment as above. I redid the logic, please let me know if that makes sense. -- To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/6707 To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: Ie44daa93e3ae4d04d091261f3ec4891caffe8026 Gerrit-PatchSet: 7 Gerrit-Project: Impala-ASF Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: Bharath Vissapragada <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Bharath Vissapragada <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Dan Hecht <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Henry Robinson <[email protected]> Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
