-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.9k
[SPARK-7375] [SQL] Avoid row copying in exchange when sort.serializeMapOutputs takes effect #5948
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
ad006a4
[SPARK-7375] Avoid defensive copying in exchange operator when sort.s…
JoshRosen 6a6bfce
Fix issue related to RangePartitioning:
JoshRosen 899e1d7
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into SPARK-7375
JoshRosen f305ff3
Reduce scope of some variables in Exchange
JoshRosen File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In order to know how many partitions will be shuffled, we need to create the RangePartitioner and compute its partition bounds. Depending on the results of the sampling, we may end up with a partitioner that produces fewer than
numPartitionspartitions, so we need to know the partitioner's actual number of partitions in order to determine whether sort-based shuffle will bypass its merge sort and fall back to hash-shuffle (in which case we can avoid a copy).In the old code, the input to the range partitioner was
rdd, so the input to the range bounds calculation may or may not have been defensively copied. As a result, I suspect that the actual bounds computed could vary depending on which shuffle mode was being used, which might result in extra work being done to compute accurate partition counts. To address this, I've updated this code to always perform a defensive copy of the partitioner input. This allows us to determine the actual partition count before computingrdd, which lets us benefit from the copy bypass optimizations.