spark-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Ash (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Comment Edited] (SPARK-3032) Potential bug when running sort-based shuffle with sorting using TimSort
Date Thu, 25 Sep 2014 22:35:34 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-3032?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14148411#comment-14148411
] 

Andrew Ash edited comment on SPARK-3032 at 9/25/14 10:35 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------

This bug prevents people from doing further testing of sort-based shuffle on the rest of the
1.1.x series.  Is this a good candidate for a backport to 1.1.1 or a later 1.1 hotfix ?


was (Author: aash):
This bug prevents people from doing testing of sort-based shuffle on the rest of the 1.1.x
series.  Is this a good candidate for a backport to 1.1 ?

> Potential bug when running sort-based shuffle with sorting using TimSort
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SPARK-3032
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-3032
>             Project: Spark
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Shuffle
>    Affects Versions: 1.1.0
>            Reporter: Saisai Shao
>            Assignee: Saisai Shao
>            Priority: Blocker
>
> When using SparkPerf's aggregate-by-key workload to test sort-based shuffle, data type
for key and value is (String, String), always meet this issue:
> {noformat}
> java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Comparison method violates its general contract!
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.Sorter$SortState.mergeLo(Sorter.java:755)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.Sorter$SortState.mergeAt(Sorter.java:493)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.Sorter$SortState.mergeCollapse(Sorter.java:420)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.Sorter$SortState.access$200(Sorter.java:294)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.Sorter.sort(Sorter.java:128)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.SizeTrackingPairBuffer.destructiveSortedIterator(SizeTrackingPairBuffer.scala:83)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.ExternalSorter.spillToMergeableFile(ExternalSorter.scala:323)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.ExternalSorter.spill(ExternalSorter.scala:271)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.ExternalSorter.maybeSpill(ExternalSorter.scala:249)
>         at org.apache.spark.util.collection.ExternalSorter.insertAll(ExternalSorter.scala:220)
>         at org.apache.spark.shuffle.sort.SortShuffleWriter.write(SortShuffleWriter.scala:85)
>         at org.apache.spark.scheduler.ShuffleMapTask.runTask(ShuffleMapTask.scala:68)
>         at org.apache.spark.scheduler.ShuffleMapTask.runTask(ShuffleMapTask.scala:41)
>         at org.apache.spark.scheduler.Task.run(Task.scala:54)
>         at org.apache.spark.executor.Executor$TaskRunner.run(Executor.scala:199)
>         at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1110)
>         at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:603)
>         at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:722)
> {noformat}
> Seems the current partitionKeyComparator which use hashcode of String as key comparator
break some sorting contracts. 
> Also I tested using data type Int as key, this is OK to pass the test, since hashcode
of Int is its self. So I think potentially partitionDiff + hashcode of String may break the
sorting contracts.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@spark.apache.org


Mime
View raw message