Github user mccheah commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21221#discussion_r207004997 --- Diff: core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/executor/ExecutorMetrics.scala --- @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +/* + * 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.spark.executor + +import org.apache.spark.annotation.DeveloperApi +import org.apache.spark.metrics.ExecutorMetricType + +/** + * :: DeveloperApi :: + * Metrics tracked for executors and the driver. + * + * Executor-level metrics are sent from each executor to the driver as part of the Heartbeat. + */ +@DeveloperApi +class ExecutorMetrics private[spark] extends Serializable { + + // Metrics are indexed by MetricGetter.values + private val metrics = new Array[Long](ExecutorMetricType.values.length) --- End diff -- Yup that's fine - I did some googling, unfortunately there isn't a great way to iterate over fields of a case class. You could create a thin wrapper object around the array instead though, if we really think the nicer API is worthwhile: ``` case class Metrics(values: Seq[Long]) { def someMetric1(): Long = values(0) def .... def ... } ``` Or even this: ``` case class Metrics(metric1: Long, metric2: Long, metfic3: Long, ...) { def values(): Seq[Long] = Seq(metric1, metric2, metric3, ...) } ``` The latter which would be better because you'd be guaranteed to create the struct with the right number of metrics. Though such abstractions are not necessary by any means.
--- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org