vinodkc opened a new pull request, #57342:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/57342

   <!--
   Thanks for sending a pull request!  Here are some tips for you:
     1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines: 
https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html
     2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR: 
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html
     3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g., 
'[WIP][SPARK-XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
     4. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
     5. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes.
     6. If possible, provide a concise example to reproduce the issue for a 
faster review.
     7. If you want to add a new configuration, please read the guideline first 
for naming configurations in
        
'core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/internal/config/ConfigEntry.scala'.
     8. If you want to add or modify an error type or message, please read the 
guideline first in
        'common/utils/src/main/resources/error/README.md'.
   -->
   
   ### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
   <!--
   Please clarify what changes you are proposing. The purpose of this section 
is to outline the changes and how this PR fixes the issue. 
   If possible, please consider writing useful notes for better and faster 
reviews in your PR. See the examples below.
     1. If you refactor some codes with changing classes, showing the class 
hierarchy will help reviewers.
     2. If you fix some SQL features, you can provide some references of other 
DBMSes.
     3. If there is design documentation, please add the link.
     4. If there is a discussion in the mailing list, please add the link.
   -->
   When `SparkConnectService.stop()` is called, it shuts down the gRPC server 
using `server.shutdownNow()`. However, `shutdownNow()` returns immediately 
without waiting for the server to finish shutting down — meaning the OS port 
the server was listening on may not be released yet.
   
   If `start()` is called right after `stop()` on the same port (as several 
tests in `SparkConnectServiceKeepAliveSuite` do), the bind can fail with a 
`BindException` because the port is still held.
   
   The fix: call `server.awaitTermination(30, TimeUnit.SECONDS)` after 
`shutdownNow()`. This waits up to 30 seconds for the gRPC server to fully stop 
and release the OS port, so any immediate `start()` that follows is guaranteed 
to find the port free. The 30-second cap avoids an indefinite wait in case of 
an unexpected hang during shutdown.
   
   ### Why are the changes needed?
   <!--
   Please clarify why the changes are needed. For instance,
     1. If you propose a new API, clarify the use case for a new API.
     2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
   -->
   `SparkConnectServiceKeepAliveSuite` (introduced in #57202) contains three 
tests that each call `SparkConnectService.stop()` immediately followed by 
`SparkConnectService.start()` on the same port. Because `shutdownNow()` is 
non-blocking, the port was not always free by the time `start()` tried to bind, 
producing intermittent CI failures:
   
   java.net.BindException: Failed to bind to address 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:15312:
   Service 'org.apache.spark.sql.connect.service.SparkConnectService' failed
   after 0 retries (starting from 15312)!
   
   ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
   <!--
   Note that it means *any* user-facing change including all aspects such as 
new features, bug fixes, or other behavior changes. Documentation-only updates 
are not considered user-facing changes.
   
   If yes, please clarify the previous behavior and the change this PR proposes 
- provide the console output, description and/or an example to show the 
behavior difference if possible.
   If possible, please also clarify if this is a user-facing change compared to 
the released Spark versions or within the unreleased branches such as master.
   If no, write 'No'.
   -->
   No. `stop()` is not a public API. The added blocking wait is only observable 
as a slightly longer stop() duration (bounded by in-flight gRPC request drain 
time), which was already the case for the timeout-based overload.
   
   ### How was this patch tested?
   <!--
   If tests were added, say they were added here. Please make sure to add some 
test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive 
cases if possible.
   If it was tested in a way different from regular unit tests, please clarify 
how you tested step by step, ideally copy and paste-able, so that other 
reviewers can test and check, and descendants can verify in the future.
   If tests were not added, please describe why they were not added and/or why 
it was difficult to add.
   If benchmark tests were added, please run the benchmarks in GitHub Actions 
for the consistent environment, and the instructions could accord to: 
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html#github-workflow-benchmarks.
   -->
   The existing `SparkConnectServiceKeepAliveSuite` tests exercise the 
stop/start lifecycle. No new tests are needed — this is a one-line fix that 
eliminates the race those tests were hitting.
   
   ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
   <!--
   If generative AI tooling has been used in the process of authoring this 
patch, please include the
   phrase: 'Generated-by: ' followed by the name of the tool and its version.
   If no, write 'No'.
   Please refer to the [ASF Generative Tooling 
Guidance](https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html) for details.
   -->
   Generated-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6


-- 
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]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to