Skip to content
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

Bump default value of max split count per task for FTE #22622

Conversation

losipiuk
Copy link
Member

@losipiuk losipiuk commented Jul 8, 2024

With limit of 256 splits per task it was possible to end up with very small tasks and possibly even reach limit of number of tasks per stage (2^^15). The problem appeared when splits were very small. Task sizing should be mostly done based on split size; max number of splits should be treated as extra limit to be reached only in rare situations. This PR bumps default value 8x to 2048.

Description

Additional context and related issues

Release notes

(x) This is not user-visible or is docs only, and no release notes are required.
( ) Release notes are required. Please propose a release note for me.
( ) Release notes are required, with the following suggested text:

With limit of 256 splits per task it was possible to end up with very
small tasks and possibly even reach limit of number of tasks per stage
(2^^15). The problem appeared when splits were very small.
Task sizing should be mostly done based on split size; max
number of splits should be treated as extra limit to be reached only in
rare situations. This PR bumps default value 8x to 2048.
@cla-bot cla-bot bot added the cla-signed label Jul 8, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added the docs label Jul 8, 2024
@losipiuk
Copy link
Member Author

I verified this PR with benchmarks and it does not seem to introduce any perf regression. The logic should not matter for common case where data files are reasonably sized and the splits limit is not effective

@losipiuk losipiuk marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2024 22:47
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 8, 2024

This pull request has gone a while without any activity. Tagging the Trino developer relations team: @bitsondatadev @colebow @mosabua

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Aug 8, 2024
@mosabua
Copy link
Member

mosabua commented Aug 26, 2024

@losipiuk and @wendigo .. please merge when you are ready.

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale label Aug 27, 2024
@losipiuk losipiuk merged commit 0e32d0a into trinodb:master Sep 2, 2024
98 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 456 milestone Sep 2, 2024
@mosabua
Copy link
Member

mosabua commented Sep 3, 2024

Does this need a release notes entry or doc change @losipiuk @wendigo ?

@losipiuk
Copy link
Member Author

losipiuk commented Sep 3, 2024

No I do not think so

@losipiuk losipiuk added the no-release-notes This pull request does not require release notes entry label Sep 3, 2024
@mosabua
Copy link
Member

mosabua commented Sep 3, 2024

Thanks @losipiuk

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cla-signed docs no-release-notes This pull request does not require release notes entry
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants