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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[BugFix] Fix getNextWorker overflow (backport #53213) #53272

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[BugFix] Fix getNextWorker overflow (backport #53213) #53272

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+1,821 −0

Conversation

mergify[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot commented Nov 27, 2024 •
edited by wanpengfei-git
Loading

Why I'm doing:

The getNextWorker() method uses a global AtomicInteger nextIndexId, which increments by one with each call to getNextWorker(). As a result, it may overflow into a negative value.

java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: Index -1 out of bounds for length 3
        at com.google.common.collect.RegularImmutableMap$Values.get(RegularImmutableMap.java:384) ~[spark-dpp-1.0.0.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.DefaultWorkerProvider.getNextWorker(DefaultWorkerProvider.java:354) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.DefaultWorkerProvider.selectNextWorker(DefaultWorkerProvider.java:141) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.assignment.RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.assignGatherFragmentToWorker(RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.java:91) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.assignment.RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.assignFragmentToWorker(RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.java:76) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.CoordinatorPreprocessor.computeFragmentInstances(CoordinatorPreprocessor.java:244) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.CoordinatorPreprocessor.prepareExec(CoordinatorPreprocessor.java:200) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.DefaultCoordinator.prepareExec(DefaultCoordinator.java:456) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.DefaultCoordinator.startScheduling(DefaultCoordinator.java:501) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.Coordinator.startScheduling(Coordinator.java:105) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.Coordinator.exec(Coordinator.java:88) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.StmtExecutor.handleQueryStmt(StmtExecutor.java:1119) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.StmtExecutor.execute(StmtExecutor.java:633) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]

What I'm doing:

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

Bugfix cherry-pick branch check:

Why I'm doing:

The getNextWorker() method uses a global AtomicInteger nextIndexId, which increments by one with each call to getNextWorker(). As a result, it may overflow into a negative value.

java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: Index -1 out of bounds for length 3
        at com.google.common.collect.RegularImmutableMap$Values.get(RegularImmutableMap.java:384) ~[spark-dpp-1.0.0.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.DefaultWorkerProvider.getNextWorker(DefaultWorkerProvider.java:354) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.DefaultWorkerProvider.selectNextWorker(DefaultWorkerProvider.java:141) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.assignment.RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.assignGatherFragmentToWorker(RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.java:91) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.assignment.RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.assignFragmentToWorker(RemoteFragmentAssignmentStrategy.java:76) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.CoordinatorPreprocessor.computeFragmentInstances(CoordinatorPreprocessor.java:244) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.CoordinatorPreprocessor.prepareExec(CoordinatorPreprocessor.java:200) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.DefaultCoordinator.prepareExec(DefaultCoordinator.java:456) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.DefaultCoordinator.startScheduling(DefaultCoordinator.java:501) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.Coordinator.startScheduling(Coordinator.java:105) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.scheduler.Coordinator.exec(Coordinator.java:88) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.StmtExecutor.handleQueryStmt(StmtExecutor.java:1119) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]
        at com.starrocks.qe.StmtExecutor.execute(StmtExecutor.java:633) ~[starrocks-fe.jar:?]

What I'm doing:

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

@ZiheLiu @mergify
[BugFix] Fix getNextWorker overflow (#53213)
5aa9531 
Signed-off-by: zihe.liu <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 4e70ef5)

# Conflicts:
#	fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/lake/qe/scheduler/DefaultSharedDataWorkerProvider.java
#	fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/qe/scheduler/DefaultWorkerProvider.java
#	fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/lake/qe/scheduler/DefaultSharedDataWorkerProviderTest.java
#	fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/qe/scheduler/DefaultWorkerProviderTest.java
@mergify mergify bot added the conflicts label Nov 27, 2024
@mergify Mergify
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Nov 27, 2024

Cherry-pick of 4e70ef5 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/branch-3.0/pr-53213
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/branch-3.0'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit 4e70ef57dd.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Changes to be committed:
	new file:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/qe/WorkerProviderHelper.java

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add/rm <file>..." as appropriate to mark resolution)
	deleted by us:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/lake/qe/scheduler/DefaultSharedDataWorkerProvider.java
	deleted by us:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/qe/scheduler/DefaultWorkerProvider.java
	deleted by us:   fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/lake/qe/scheduler/DefaultSharedDataWorkerProviderTest.java
	deleted by us:   fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/qe/scheduler/DefaultWorkerProviderTest.java

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

@mergify mergify bot mentioned this pull request Nov 27, 2024
Merged
24 tasks
@mergify mergify bot closed this Nov 27, 2024
@mergify Mergify
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Nov 27, 2024

@mergify[bot]: Backport conflict, please reslove the conflict and resubmit the pr

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@ZiheLiu ZiheLiu

Labels
automerge conflicts
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@ZiheLiu