[GOBBLIN-2134] update job status to SKIPPED for all the dependent jobs of a cancelled job by arjun4084346 · Pull Request #4049 · apache/gobblin

arjun4084346 · 2024-09-05T19:29:54Z

fix merge conflicts
add tests

Dear Gobblin maintainers,

Please accept this PR. I understand that it will not be reviewed until I have checked off all the steps below!

JIRA

My PR addresses the following Gobblin JIRA issues and references them in the PR title. For example, "[GOBBLIN-XXX] My Gobblin PR"
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOBBLIN-2134

Description

Here are some details about my PR, including screenshots (if applicable):
created SKIPPED execution status
used it for the jobs that cannot be run because it's parent job is cancelled

Tests

My PR adds the following unit tests OR does not need testing for this extremely good reason:
updated tests in ReevaluateDagProcTest

Commits

My commits all reference JIRA issues in their subject lines, and I have squashed multiple commits if they address the same issue. In addition, my commits follow the guidelines from "How to write a good git commit message":
1. Subject is separated from body by a blank line
2. Subject is limited to 50 characters
3. Subject does not end with a period
4. Subject uses the imperative mood ("add", not "adding")
5. Body wraps at 72 characters
6. Body explains "what" and "why", not "how"

codecov-commenter · 2024-09-05T19:45:55Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 41.11%. Comparing base (444f266) to head (8d5589d).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #4049      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     38.79%   41.11%   +2.31%     
- Complexity     1599     2201     +602     
============================================
  Files           388      480      +92     
  Lines         15998    20360    +4362     
  Branches       1585     2355     +770     
============================================
+ Hits           6207     8371    +2164     
- Misses         9293    11097    +1804     
- Partials        498      892     +394

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

fix merge conflicts

phet

nice improvement. it generally looks good, but let's align on whether SKIPPED is only job-level or also flow-level. once we decide, I'll take one more pass through the ReevaluateDagProcTest to read that more closely

phet · 2024-09-09T21:29:02Z

...blin-flow-config-service-api/src/main/pegasus/org/apache/gobblin/service/ExecutionStatus.pdl

  CANCELLED
+
+  /**
+  * Flow or job is skipped


how would a flow be skipped? wouldn't the flow instead be CANCELLED or FAILED? after that (fewer than all of) that flow's jobs may be SKIPPED (fewer, because at least one would be CANCELLED or FAILED)

i think it just comes down to how we define things. imo, when a flow execution is skipped when there is already an execution for the same flow is running, status SKIPPED sounds more appropriate.

phet · 2024-09-09T21:31:10Z

gobblin-service/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/modules/orchestration/DagUtils.java

      boolean addFlag = true;
-      if (executionStatus == PENDING || executionStatus == PENDING_RETRY || executionStatus == PENDING_RESUME) {
+      if (executionStatus == PENDING || executionStatus == PENDING_RETRY || executionStatus == PENDING_RESUME ||
+          executionStatus == SKIPPED) {


I'm unclear here: is "skipping" able to be reversed, so the node can later be ready? (I'm equating getNext to identifying the set of "ready" nodes.)

no , skipped cannot not be reversed. this diff should not be here, ill change it. i think it might be appropriate in some draft version of this PR, but not anymore

phet · 2024-09-09T21:39:12Z

gobblin-service/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/monitoring/KafkaJobStatusMonitor.java

  private static final List<ExecutionStatus> ORDERED_EXECUTION_STATUSES = ImmutableList
      .of(ExecutionStatus.COMPILED, ExecutionStatus.PENDING, ExecutionStatus.PENDING_RESUME, ExecutionStatus.PENDING_RETRY,
-          ExecutionStatus.ORCHESTRATED, ExecutionStatus.RUNNING, ExecutionStatus.COMPLETE,
+          ExecutionStatus.ORCHESTRATED, ExecutionStatus.RUNNING, ExecutionStatus.SKIPPED, ExecutionStatus.COMPLETE,


why is CANCELLED last, and SKIPPED prior to COMPLETE? what of the similar idea that news of job COMPLETE might arrive after we'd already attempted cancellation or skipping?

these four are the terminal statuses and once a job reaches here, further GTEs can be ignored.
we also do not expect to see two of them for the same job.
yes, there can be some combinations of events among these four, that may arrive due to race condition, but i think, in that case, it is ok for GaaS to just adhere to any of the ordering. I do not want to change the correct ordering, so I added SKIPPED before other terminal statuses, to basically support the same idea of yours - let it show complete if it is cancelled/skipped earlier.

...ervice/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/modules/orchestration/proc/DagProcUtils.java

phet · 2024-09-09T21:49:47Z

...ervice/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/modules/orchestration/proc/DagProcUtils.java

+    findDependentJobs(dag, node, dependentJobs);
+    for (Dag.DagNode<JobExecutionPlan> dependentJob : dependentJobs) {
+      Map<String, String> jobMetadata = TimingEventUtils.getJobMetadata(Maps.newHashMap(), dependentJob.getValue());
+      DagProc.eventSubmitter.getTimingEvent(TimingEvent.LauncherTimings.JOB_SKIPPED).stop(jobMetadata);


same comment about hard-coding to this static

...ervice/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/modules/orchestration/proc/DagProcUtils.java

phet · 2024-09-09T22:00:31Z

...e/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/modules/orchestration/proc/ReevaluateDagProc.java

        dag.setMessage("Flow failed because job " + jobName + " failed");
        dag.setFlowEvent(TimingEvent.FlowTimings.FLOW_FAILED);
        dagManagementStateStore.getDagManagerMetrics().incrementExecutorFailed(dagNode);
+        DagProcUtils.sendSkippedEventForDependentJobs(dag, dagNode);


wondering... is this a kind of 'ping-pong'?
a. a job fails, which emits a GTE
b. the KJSM sees the GTE and then creates a DagActionType.REEVALUATE
c. this ReevaluateDagProc emits a SKIPPED GTE for all dependent jobs
d. the KJSM sees those GTEs and creates a DagActionType.REEVALUATE for each of those

I'm wondering whether step d.) is necessary, given we setting SKIPPED should be a bulk operation on ALL dependent jobs. does the KJSM really need to create a DagAction for reevaluating those?

yes (d) needs to be removed. in a draft version, i was emitting skipped events only for the child jobs not for all the dependent jobs.

phet · 2024-09-09T22:01:52Z

...e/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/modules/orchestration/proc/ReevaluateDagProc.java

+        DagProcUtils.sendSkippedEventForDependentJobs(dag, dagNode);
        break;
      case CANCELLED:
+      case SKIPPED:


if this is job-level SKIPPED, due to the "ping-pong" I just described?

or is arising from a flow-level execution-status of SKIPPED. if the latter, who sets that? I thought it would be only job-level

ah, yes this needs to be removed. in a draft version, i was emitting skipped events only for the child jobs not for all the dependent jobs.

add a new status SKIPPED for skipped jobs and flows

96b36c4

fix merge conflicts

arjun4084346 force-pushed the dpemonitoringfix3.2 branch from 8d5589d to 4bb8ae5 Compare September 8, 2024 19:06

add tests

43d53e5

arjun4084346 force-pushed the dpemonitoringfix3.2 branch from 4bb8ae5 to 43d53e5 Compare September 9, 2024 03:22

phet reviewed Sep 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

address review comments

fc6f745

Conversation

arjun4084346 commented Sep 5, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

JIRA

Description

Tests

Commits

Uh oh!

codecov-commenter commented Sep 5, 2024

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

phet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

phet Sep 9, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

phet Sep 9, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

arjun4084346 commented Sep 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading

phet Sep 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading

phet Sep 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading