Skip to content

[SPARK-16764][SQL] Recommend disabling vectorized parquet reader on OutOfMemoryError #14387

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

sameeragarwal
Copy link
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

We currently don't bound or manage the data array size used by column vectors in the vectorized reader (they're just bound by INT.MAX) which may lead to OOMs while reading data. As a short term fix, this patch intercepts the OutOfMemoryError exception and suggest the user to disable the vectorized parquet reader.

How was this patch tested?

Existing Tests

@rxin
Copy link
Contributor

rxin commented Jul 28, 2016

LGTM pending Jenkins.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Jul 28, 2016

Test build #62955 has finished for PR 14387 at commit b62c1d2.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@rxin
Copy link
Contributor

rxin commented Jul 28, 2016

Merging in master/2.0.

asfgit pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2016
…utOfMemoryError

## What changes were proposed in this pull request?

We currently don't bound or manage the data array size used by column vectors in the vectorized reader (they're just bound by INT.MAX) which may lead to OOMs while reading data. As a short term fix, this patch intercepts the OutOfMemoryError exception and suggest the user to disable the vectorized parquet reader.

## How was this patch tested?

Existing Tests

Author: Sameer Agarwal <sameerag@cs.berkeley.edu>

Closes #14387 from sameeragarwal/oom.

(cherry picked from commit 3fd39b8)
Signed-off-by: Reynold Xin <rxin@databricks.com>
@asfgit asfgit closed this in 3fd39b8 Jul 28, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants