[SPARK-50430][CORE] Use the standard Properties.clone instead of manual clone #48978
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
HyukjinKwon
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 27, 2024
…al clone ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR proposes to use the standard Properties.clone instead of manual clone ### Why are the changes needed? In a very rare condition, when the properties were changed during the clone of Properties, it might throw an exception as below: ``` : java.util.ConcurrentModificationException at java.util.Hashtable$Enumerator.next(Hashtable.java:1408) at java.util.Hashtable.putAll(Hashtable.java:523) at org.apache.spark.util.Utils$.cloneProperties(Utils.scala:3474) at org.apache.spark.SparkContext.getCredentialResolvedProperties(SparkContext.scala:523) at org.apache.spark.SparkContext.runJobInternal(SparkContext.scala:3157) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.$anonfun$collect$1(RDD.scala:1104) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDDOperationScope$.withScope(RDDOperationScope.scala:165) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDDOperationScope$.withScope(RDDOperationScope.scala:125) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDDOperationScope$.withScope(RDDOperationScope.scala:112) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.withScope(RDD.scala:454) at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.collect(RDD.scala:1102) at org.apache.spark.mllib.evaluation.AreaUnderCurve$.of(AreaUnderCurve.scala:44) at org.apache.spark.mllib.evaluation.BinaryClassificationMetrics.areaUnderROC(BinaryClassificationMetrics.scala:127) at org.apache.spark.ml.evaluation.BinaryClassificationEvaluator.evaluate(BinaryClassificationEvaluator.scala:101) at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor323.invoke(Unknown Source) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) at py4j.reflection.MethodInvoker.invoke(MethodInvoker.java:244) at py4j.reflection.ReflectionEngine.invoke(ReflectionEngine.java:397) at py4j.Gateway.invoke(Gateway.java:306) at py4j.commands.AbstractCommand.invokeMethod(AbstractCommand.java:132) at py4j.commands.CallCommand.execute(CallCommand.java:79) at py4j.ClientServerConnection.waitForCommands(ClientServerConnection.java:199) at py4j.ClientServerConnection.run(ClientServerConnection.java:119) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:750) ``` We should use the standard clone method. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? It fixes a very corner case bug as described above. ### How was this patch tested? It's difficult to test because the issue is from concurrent execution. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes #48978 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-50430. Authored-by: Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit 7614819) Signed-off-by: Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]>
|
Merged to master. |
|
|
|
Thank you for reverting this from |
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?
This PR proposes to use the standard Properties.clone instead of manual clone
Why are the changes needed?
In a very rare condition, when the properties were changed during the clone of Properties, it might throw an exception as below:
We should use the standard clone method.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
It fixes a very corner case bug as described above.
How was this patch tested?
It's difficult to test because the issue is from concurrent execution.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.