[BLAZE-287][FOLLOWUP] BlazeCelebornShuffleWriter should use mapped shuffle id for rerunning stage of fetch failure#712
Merged
richox merged 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom Dec 21, 2024
Conversation
Member
Author
|
Ping @RexXiong. |
…uffle id for rerunning stage of fetch failure
SteNicholas
force-pushed
the
BLAZE-287
branch
from
2b29812 to
3d6d4f5
Compare
richox
approved these changes
Dec 21, 2024
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
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #287.
Rationale for this change
When
CelebornShuffleHandle#throwsFetchFailurereturns true,BlazeCelebornShuffleWritershould use mapped shuffle id viaSparkUtils#celebornShuffleIdto avoid using wrong shuffle id.What changes are included in this PR?
BlazeCelebornShuffleWriteruses mapped shuffle idviaSparkUtils#celebornShuffleId` for throwing fetch failure.Are there any user-facing changes?
No.