[#2783] fix(spark): correct compression ratio and failure counters in Spark UI - #2784
Open
wForget wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
[#2783] fix(spark): correct compression ratio and failure counters in Spark UI#2784wForget wants to merge 2 commits into
wForget wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
0.0when the compressed shuffle size is zero.uncompressedShuffleBytestoDoublebefore division.failedTaskNumberandfailedTaskMaxAttemptNumberto0instead of-1.Why are the changes needed?
The compression ratio was calculated by dividing two
Longvalues, so Scala performed integer division and discarded the fractional part.For example,
150 / 100was calculated as1and displayed as1.0instead of the expected1.5.Additionally, initializing the failure count to
-1caused the first failure to increment the count to0, resulting in an incorrect failure summary. Starting the failure-related fields at0correctly represents the initial state and counts the first failure.Fix: #2783
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
Yes.
How was this patch tested?