Yicong-Huang opened a new issue, #4802:
URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/issues/4802

   ### What happened?
   
   
`amber/src/main/scala/org/apache/texera/amber/engine/architecture/scheduling/config/LinkConfig.scala::LinkConfig.toPartitioning`
 builds the channel list for the `BroadcastPartition` arm with 
`fromWorkerIds.zip(toWorkerIds)` — i.e. 1:1 pairing — instead of the full cross 
product. Two issues follow:
   
   1. The semantics of broadcast are "every sender targets every receiver", 
which a zip pairing does not encode.
   2. The companion helper `ChannelConfig.generateChannelConfigs` in the same 
package emits a full cross product for `BroadcastPartition`. The two helpers 
are expected to agree on routing; today they diverge for this arm.
   
   For unequal-length input lists `List.zip` also silently drops the surplus 
side, parallel to issue #4799 for `OneToOnePartition`.
   
   ### How to reproduce?
   
   ```scala
   import org.apache.texera.amber.core.virtualidentity.ActorVirtualIdentity
   import org.apache.texera.amber.core.workflow.BroadcastPartition
   import 
org.apache.texera.amber.engine.architecture.scheduling.config.LinkConfig
   import 
org.apache.texera.amber.engine.architecture.sendsemantics.partitionings.BroadcastPartitioning
   
   val w = (1 to 3).map(i => ActorVirtualIdentity(s"w$i")).toList
   val u = (1 to 3).map(i => ActorVirtualIdentity(s"u$i")).toList
   val out = LinkConfig.toPartitioning(w, u, BroadcastPartition(), 64)
   val bp = out.asInstanceOf[BroadcastPartitioning]
   bp.channels.map(c => (c.fromWorkerId.name, c.toWorkerId.name))
   // Returns: ((w1,u1), (w2,u2), (w3,u3))
   // Broadcast semantics would predict the full 3*3 cross product.
   ```
   
   ### Version
   
   1.1.0-incubating (Pre-release/Master)


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to