Skip to content

[#2508] feat(spark3): Record failed tasks on any shuffle write/failure into event logs #2509

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jun 25, 2025

Conversation

zuston
Copy link
Member

@zuston zuston commented Jun 19, 2025

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Record failed tasks on any shuffle write/failure into event logs

Why are the changes needed?

For #2508. Having this PR, we could retrieve spark jobs failure reason from the whole clusters' event logs.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Neen't

@zuston zuston requested a review from jerqi June 19, 2025 06:13
@zuston zuston linked an issue Jun 19, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
3 tasks
@@ -636,6 +638,8 @@ message ReportShuffleReadMetricRequest {
int32 stageId = 2;
int64 taskId = 3;
map<string, ShuffleReadMetric> metrics = 4;
bool isShuffleReadFailed = 6;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could u remove shuffle and why this is 6 instead of 5?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this a boolean or enum?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could u remove shuffle and why this is 6 instead of 5?

Mistake.

Is this a boolean or enum?

boolean

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 19, 2025

Test Results

 3 049 files  ± 0   3 049 suites  ±0   6h 49m 14s ⏱️ +36s
 1 188 tests + 2   1 187 ✅ + 2   1 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
15 067 runs  +25  15 052 ✅ +25  15 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 457725b. ± Comparison against base commit a69930d.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@@ -636,6 +638,8 @@ message ReportShuffleReadMetricRequest {
int32 stageId = 2;
int64 taskId = 3;
map<string, ShuffleReadMetric> metrics = 4;
bool isShuffleReadFailed = 5;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you remove shuffle from the variable name? Because the message already has the shuffle.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How about changing this to isTaskReadFailed ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

isReadFailed may be enough. isTaskReadFailed is ok if this fail will cause the failure of the task.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

isTaskReadFailed is ok if this fail will cause the failure of the task.

It will

@zuston
Copy link
Member Author

zuston commented Jun 24, 2025

Update @jerqi

@zuston zuston merged commit ed26840 into apache:master Jun 25, 2025
41 checks passed
@zuston zuston deleted the taskShuffleFailure branch June 25, 2025 02:10
zuston added a commit to zuston/incubator-uniffle that referenced this pull request Jul 2, 2025
…failure into event logs (apache#2509)

Record failed tasks on any shuffle write/failure into event logs

For apache#2508. Having this PR, we could retrieve spark jobs failure reason from the whole clusters' event logs.

No.

Neen't
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[FEATURE] Add spark event of push/read task failure for later analysis
2 participants