Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just realize that
waitUntilEmptyis not enough. InwaitUntilEmpty, it only checkseventQueue.isEmpty. But wheneventQueue.isEmptyis true, there is still a chance that listeners do not finish their jobs or the memory is not synchronized.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc @andrewor14
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good catch. A solution is to have
eventQueuepeek instead of take, such that we remove the event from the queue only after all listeners have finished processing it.Though many other places have long been relying on
waitUntilEmptybefore this PR. It makes me wonder how likely this race condition actually causes a test failure... (nevertheless it's possible)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm, looks like
LinkedBlockingQueue's take() is special in that it waits for the next item to be ready. It seems there isn't an equivalent for peek... we may have to synchronize some other way.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since
waitUntilEmptyis only for test, is it possible that moving suchwaitlogic to the SparkListener instances used in tests? E.g.,There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@zsxwing we have to keep
waitUntilEmptyin LiveListenerBus.scala (unfortunately) because DAGSchedulerSuite also uses it. I started a more general solution at #544. Maybe we can move the discussion there.