-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.4k
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
[SPARK-50235][SQL] Clean up ColumnVector resource after processing all rows in ColumnarToRowExec #48767
Conversation
|if ($batch != null) { | ||
| $batch.close(); | ||
|} |
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.
This looks like memory leak for off-heap case.
@@ -194,9 +194,14 @@ case class ColumnarToRowExec(child: SparkPlan) extends ColumnarToRowTransition w | |||
| $shouldStop | |||
| } | |||
| $idx = $numRows; | |||
| $batch.closeIfNotWritable(); |
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.
For writable column vectors, they are reused across batches, so we cannot close them until finishing all batches (see below).
…l rows in ColumnarToRowExec ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This patch cleans up ColumnVector resource after processing all rows in ColumnarToRowExec. This patch only focus on codeben implementation of ColumnarToRowExec. For non-codegen, it should be relatively rare to use, and currently no good way has proposed, so leaving it to a follow up. ### Why are the changes needed? Currently we only assign null to ColumnarBatch object but it doesn't release the resources hold by the vectors in the batch. For OnHeapColumnVector, the Java arrays may be automatically collected by JVM, but for OffHeapColumnVector, the allocated off-heap memory will be leaked. For custom ColumnVector implementations like Arrow-based, it also possibly causes issues on memory safety if the underlying buffers are reused across batches. Because when ColumnarToRowExec begins to fill values for next batch, the arrays in previous batch are still hold. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? Existing tests. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes #48767 from viirya/close_if_not_writable. Authored-by: Liang-Chi Hsieh <viirya@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org> (cherry picked from commit 800faf0) Signed-off-by: Kent Yao <yao@apache.org>
Merged to master and 3.5 Thank you @viirya @dongjoon-hyun |
Thanks @dongjoon-hyun @yaooqinn |
Starting with this commit (800faf0), I get an error with the following commands:
The
If I build with the commit previous to 800faf0, I get actual results rather than an error. |
It was fixed by #49021. |
Just for the record, Iceberg community seems to report a bug against this patch. |
Thanks @dongjoon-hyun. Please see #49131 (comment) for some discussion. |
Thank you for clarifying that swiftly! |
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This patch cleans up ColumnVector resource after processing all rows in ColumnarToRowExec. This patch only focus on codeben implementation of ColumnarToRowExec. For non-codegen, it should be relatively rare to use, and currently no good way has proposed, so leaving it to a follow up.
Why are the changes needed?
Currently we only assign null to ColumnarBatch object but it doesn't release the resources hold by the vectors in the batch. For OnHeapColumnVector, the Java arrays may be automatically collected by JVM, but for OffHeapColumnVector, the allocated off-heap memory will be leaked.
For custom ColumnVector implementations like Arrow-based, it also possibly causes issues on memory safety if the underlying buffers are reused across batches. Because when ColumnarToRowExec begins to fill values for next batch, the arrays in previous batch are still hold.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Existing tests.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No