[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13990335#comment-13990335
]
Steven Phillips commented on DRILL-641:
---------------------------------------
before we can do that, we will need to change how we do memory accounting. With
the change from DRILL-620, each operator has its own buffer allocator, along
with its own accountor. Right now this only works if all downstream operators
cleanup first.
We would need to transfer accounting between operators for this to work.
> Better semantic and handling for kill()
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: DRILL-641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-641
> Project: Apache Drill
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Mehant Baid
>
> Currently when an operator invokes kill(), only the upstream operators within
> that fragment get terminated. This causes problems if the upstream operator
> in a different fragment is still continuously producing batches, and it then
> becomes the responsibility of the operator to drain all the batches even
> though a kill was issued.
> While dealing with plans with multiple fragments we would need to inform the
> sender that a kill has been invoked. It would then be the responsibility of
> the sender to not push any more batches to the corresponding receiver.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
