Skip to content

Conversation

@lianhuiwang
Copy link
Contributor

based on #1328.
when one task of parent stage is not finished, so other executors is idle. we can pre-start the reduce stage to make good use of these idle executors.
This can achieve better resource utilization and improve the overall job performance, especially when there're lots of executors granted to the application.in my no-cache application's test, it improves the job by about 10%.
@lirui-intel @sryza @rxin

@lianhuiwang lianhuiwang changed the title [Spark 2387][Core]remove stage barrier [Spark 2387][Core]Remove Stage's barrier Nov 24, 2014
@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23784 has started for PR 3430 at commit 464cb1a.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23784 has finished for PR 3430 at commit 464cb1a.

  • This patch fails RAT tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds the following public classes (experimental):
    • class PartialBlockFetcherIterator(

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/23784/
Test FAILed.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23785 has started for PR 3430 at commit ac0a8a1.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23785 has finished for PR 3430 at commit ac0a8a1.

  • This patch fails Scala style tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds the following public classes (experimental):
    • class PartialBlockFetcherIterator(

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/23785/
Test FAILed.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23786 has started for PR 3430 at commit cb77455.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23786 has finished for PR 3430 at commit cb77455.

  • This patch fails Scala style tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds the following public classes (experimental):
    • class PartialBlockFetcherIterator(

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/23786/
Test FAILed.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23788 has started for PR 3430 at commit ad97d33.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Nov 24, 2014

Test build #23788 has finished for PR 3430 at commit ad97d33.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds the following public classes (experimental):
    • class PartialBlockFetcherIterator(

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/23788/
Test PASSed.

@JoshRosen
Copy link
Contributor

This seems like a complicated change for only a 10% performance improvement, especially when there's probably lower-hanging fruit that's easier / safer to optimize.

@lianhuiwang lianhuiwang changed the title [Spark 2387][Core]Remove Stage's barrier [Spark-2387][Core]Remove Stage's barrier Jan 9, 2015
@lianhuiwang lianhuiwang changed the title [Spark-2387][Core]Remove Stage's barrier [SPARK-2387][Core]Remove Stage's barrier Jan 9, 2015
@lianhuiwang
Copy link
Contributor Author

@JoshRosen i think when we need this feature, we just set spark.scheduler.removeStageBarrier=true and then own this performance improvement. it is important that will not affect other's features.

@pwendell
Copy link
Contributor

pwendell commented Jun 4, 2015

I'd propose to close this issue. It's a fairly large change and needs more discussion before being seriously considered to be part of spark.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in 9982d45 Jun 4, 2015
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.

5 participants