viirya commented on a change in pull request #29014:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/29014#discussion_r459827811
##########
File path:
core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/scheduler/TaskSchedulerImpl.scala
##########
@@ -939,12 +941,40 @@ private[spark] class TaskSchedulerImpl(
override def executorDecommission(
executorId: String, decommissionInfo: ExecutorDecommissionInfo): Unit = {
+ synchronized {
+ // The scheduler can get multiple decommission updates from multiple
sources,
+ // and some of those can have isHostDecommissioned false. We merge them
such that
+ // if we heard isHostDecommissioned ever true, then we keep that one
since it is
+ // most likely coming from the cluster manager and thus authoritative
+ val oldDecomInfo = executorsPendingDecommission.get(executorId)
+ if (oldDecomInfo.isEmpty || !oldDecomInfo.get.isHostDecommissioned) {
+ executorsPendingDecommission(executorId) = decommissionInfo
+ }
+ }
rootPool.executorDecommission(executorId)
backend.reviveOffers()
}
- override def executorLost(executorId: String, reason: ExecutorLossReason):
Unit = {
+ override def getExecutorDecommissionInfo(executorId: String)
+ : Option[ExecutorDecommissionInfo] = synchronized {
+ executorsPendingDecommission.get(executorId)
+ }
+
+ override def executorLost(executorId: String, givenReason:
ExecutorLossReason): Unit = {
var failedExecutor: Option[String] = None
+ val reason = givenReason match {
+ // Handle executor process loss due to decommissioning
+ case ExecutorProcessLost(message, workerLost, causedByApp) =>
+ val executorDecommissionInfo = getExecutorDecommissionInfo(executorId)
+ ExecutorProcessLost(
+ message,
+ // Also mark the worker lost if we know that the host was
decommissioned
+ workerLost ||
executorDecommissionInfo.exists(_.isHostDecommissioned),
Review comment:
Oh I see. You're right.
Is it possible any `ExecutorDecommissionInfo` come in after
`ExecutorProcessLost`?
If so, I think when we reach this, it's still possible the
`ExecutorDecommissionInfo` with host decommission hasn't come in
`executorsPendingDecommission` yet. In this case, we cannot mark worker lost
correctly. And we cannot remove the `ExecutorDecommissionInfo` from
`executorsPendingDecommission` too?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
