Ngone51 opened a new pull request #28742:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/28742
<!--
Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines:
https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html
2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR:
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html
3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g.,
'[WIP][SPARK-XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
4. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
5. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes.
6. If possible, provide a concise example to reproduce the issue for a
faster review.
7. If you want to add a new configuration, please read the guideline first
for naming configurations in
'core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/internal/config/ConfigEntry.scala'.
-->
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
<!--
Please clarify what changes you are proposing. The purpose of this section
is to outline the changes and how this PR fixes the issue.
If possible, please consider writing useful notes for better and faster
reviews in your PR. See the examples below.
1. If you refactor some codes with changing classes, showing the class
hierarchy will help reviewers.
2. If you fix some SQL features, you can provide some references of other
DBMSes.
3. If there is design documentation, please add the link.
4. If there is a discussion in the mailing list, please add the link.
-->
This PR adds the check to see whether the allocated executors for the
waiting application is empty before recognizing it as a possible hang
application.
### Why are the changes needed?
<!--
Please clarify why the changes are needed. For instance,
1. If you propose a new API, clarify the use case for a new API.
2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
-->
It's a bugfix. The warning means there are not enough resources for the
application to launch at least one executor. But we can still successfully run
a job under this warning, which means it does have launched executor.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
<!--
Note that it means *any* user-facing change including all aspects such as
the documentation fix.
If yes, please clarify the previous behavior and the change this PR proposes
- provide the console output, description and/or an example to show the
behavior difference if possible.
If possible, please also clarify if this is a user-facing change compared to
the released Spark versions or within the unreleased branches such as master.
If no, write 'No'.
-->
Yes. Before this PR, when using local cluster mode to start spark-shell,
e.g. `./bin/spark-shell --master "local-cluster[2, 1, 1024]"`, the user would
always see the warning:
```
20/06/06 22:21:02 WARN Utils: Your hostname, C02ZQ051LVDR resolves to a
loopback address: 127.0.0.1; using 192.168.1.6 instead (on interface en0)
20/06/06 22:21:02 WARN Utils: Set SPARK_LOCAL_IP if you need to bind to
another address
20/06/06 22:21:02 WARN NativeCodeLoader: Unable to load native-hadoop
library for your platform... using builtin-java classes where applicable
Setting default log level to "WARN".
To adjust logging level use sc.setLogLevel(newLevel). For SparkR, use
setLogLevel(newLevel).
NOTE: SPARK_PREPEND_CLASSES is set, placing locally compiled Spark classes
ahead of assembly.
NOTE: SPARK_PREPEND_CLASSES is set, placing locally compiled Spark classes
ahead of assembly.
Spark context Web UI available at http://192.168.1.6:4040
Spark context available as 'sc' (master = local-cluster[2, 1, 1024], app id
= app-20200606222107-0000).
Spark session available as 'spark'.
20/06/06 22:21:07 WARN Master: App app-20200606222107-0000 requires more
resource than any of Workers could have.
20/06/06 22:21:07 WARN Master: App app-20200606222107-0000 requires more
resource than any of Workers could have.
```
After this PR, the warning has gone.
### How was this patch tested?
<!--
If tests were added, say they were added here. Please make sure to add some
test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive
cases if possible.
If it was tested in a way different from regular unit tests, please clarify
how you tested step by step, ideally copy and paste-able, so that other
reviewers can test and check, and descendants can verify in the future.
If tests were not added, please describe why they were not added and/or why
it was difficult to add.
-->
Tested manually.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
