[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-12852?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16877616#comment-16877616
 ] 

zhijiang commented on FLINK-12852:
----------------------------------

Hey [~gaoyunhaii], considering the second point for long run, I have not 
thought it throughly.

I am not very sure whether it is still worth keeping dynamic local pool between 
core and max size based on slot resource matching. If this dynamic would bring 
more troubles in practice, another option is adjusting it to a fix-size local 
pool instead. The system could calculate a reasonable default size for the 
local pool as now, and users could also tune it to any size they want. E.g. 
only 2 total buffers in local pool could also work for 100 subpartitions if 
users are not caring about the performance.

> Deadlock occurs when requiring exclusive buffer for RemoteInputChannel
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-12852
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-12852
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Runtime / Network
>    Affects Versions: 1.7.2, 1.8.1, 1.9.0
>            Reporter: Yun Gao
>            Assignee: Yun Gao
>            Priority: Blocker
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>             Fix For: 1.9.0
>
>          Time Spent: 10m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> When running tests with an upstream vertex and downstream vertex, deadlock 
> occurs when submitting the job:
> {code:java}
> "Sink: Unnamed (3/500)" #136 prio=5 os_prio=0 tid=0x00007f2cca81b000 
> nid=0x38845 waiting on condition [0x00007f2cbe9fe000]
> java.lang.Thread.State: TIMED_WAITING (parking)
> at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method)
> - parking to wait for <0x000000073ed6b6f0> (a 
> java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject)
> at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.parkNanos(LockSupport.java:233)
> at 
> java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.awaitNanos(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:2078)
> at java.util.concurrent.ArrayBlockingQueue.poll(ArrayBlockingQueue.java:418)
> at 
> org.apache.flink.runtime.io.network.buffer.NetworkBufferPool.requestMemorySegments(NetworkBufferPool.java:180)
> at 
> org.apache.flink.runtime.io.network.buffer.NetworkBufferPool.requestMemorySegments(NetworkBufferPool.java:54)
> at 
> org.apache.flink.runtime.io.network.partition.consumer.RemoteInputChannel.assignExclusiveSegments(RemoteInputChannel.java:139)
> at 
> org.apache.flink.runtime.io.network.partition.consumer.SingleInputGate.assignExclusiveSegments(SingleInputGate.java:312)
> - locked <0x000000073fbc81f0> (a java.lang.Object)
> at 
> org.apache.flink.runtime.io.network.partition.consumer.SingleInputGate.setup(SingleInputGate.java:220)
> at 
> org.apache.flink.runtime.taskmanager.Task.setupPartionsAndGates(Task.java:836)
> at org.apache.flink.runtime.taskmanager.Task.run(Task.java:598)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:834)
> {code}
> This is due to the required and max of local buffer pool is not the same and 
> there may be over-allocation, when assignExclusiveSegments there are no 
> available memory.
>  
> The detail of the scenarios is as follows: The parallelism of both upstream 
> vertex and downstream vertex are 1000 and 500 respectively. There are 200 TM 
> and each TM has 10696 buffers( in total and has 10 slots. For a TM that runs 
> 9 upstream tasks and 1 downstream task, the 9 upstream tasks start first with 
> local buffer pool \{required = 500, max = 2 * 500 + 8 = 1008}, it produces 
> data quickly and each occupy about 990 buffers. Then the DownStream task 
> starts and try to assigning exclusive buffers for 1500 -9 = 1491 
> InputChannels. It requires 2981 buffers but only 1786 left. Since not all 
> downstream tasks can start, the job will be blocked finally and no buffer can 
> be released, and the deadlock finally occurred.
>  
> I think although increasing the network memory solves the problem, the 
> deadlock may not be acceptable.  Fined grained resource management  
> Flink-12761 can solve this problem, but AFAIK in 1.9 it will not include the 
> network memory into the ResourceProfile.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to