This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
ethanfeng pushed a commit to branch branch-0.6
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/celeborn.git
The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/branch-0.6 by this push:
new ad2d7f3dd [CELEBORN-1844][FOLLOWUP] Fix the condition of StoragePolicy
that worker uses memory storage
ad2d7f3dd is described below
commit ad2d7f3dd9bb45266f83e60ffca029f6386dd051
Author: SteNicholas <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: Wed Aug 6 10:36:07 2025 +0800
[CELEBORN-1844][FOLLOWUP] Fix the condition of StoragePolicy that worker
uses memory storage
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Fix the condition of `StoragePolicy` that worker uses memory storage
### Why are the changes needed?
The condition of `StoragePolicy` that worker uses memory storage is
`order.contains(StorageInfo.Type.MEMORY.name())`, which condition is wrong
because `Option#contains` is as follows:
```
final def contains[A1 >: A](elem: A1): Boolean = !isEmpty && this.get ==
elem
```
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No.
### How was this patch tested?
CI.
Closes #3408 from SteNicholas/CELEBORN-1844.
Authored-by: SteNicholas <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: mingji <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 5a459250b08818b6c57e76c76fb941a49e629c08)
Signed-off-by: mingji <[email protected]>
---
.../apache/celeborn/service/deploy/worker/storage/StoragePolicy.scala | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
a/worker/src/main/scala/org/apache/celeborn/service/deploy/worker/storage/StoragePolicy.scala
b/worker/src/main/scala/org/apache/celeborn/service/deploy/worker/storage/StoragePolicy.scala
index db6123e0a..798ad165e 100644
---
a/worker/src/main/scala/org/apache/celeborn/service/deploy/worker/storage/StoragePolicy.scala
+++
b/worker/src/main/scala/org/apache/celeborn/service/deploy/worker/storage/StoragePolicy.scala
@@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ class StoragePolicy(conf: CelebornConf, storageManager:
StorageManager, source:
// keep the old behavior, always try to use memory if worker
// has configured to use memory storage, because slots allocator
// will not allocate slots on memory storage
- if (order.contains(StorageInfo.Type.MEMORY.name())) {
+ if (order.exists(_.contains(StorageInfo.Type.MEMORY.name()))) {
order.get.indexOf(StorageInfo.Type.MEMORY.name())
} else {
order.get.indexOf(
