I'm working with a dockerized pyspark cluster which utilizes yarn. To improve the efficieny of the data processing pipelines I want to increase the amount of memory allocated to the pyspark executors and the driver.
This is done by adding the following two key, value pairs to the REST post request, which is sent out to Livy:
"driverMemory": "20g" "executorMemory": "56g"
Doing this results in the following error, which I've found in Livy's logs: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Required executor memory (57344), overhead (5734 MB), and PySpark memory (0 MB) is above the max threshold (8192 MB) of this cluster! Please check the values of 'yarn.scheduler.maximum-allocation-mb' and/or 'yarn.nodemanager.resource.memory-mb'.
Of course I've appropriately edited the yarn-site.xml and set both of the mentioned values to 64 GB by including the following lines in the file and it looks like this but it doesn't seem to make a difference.
Similar problem occurs with different driverMemory and executorMemory values if executorMemory +10% overhead is more than 8192 MB.
How can I fix this and allocate more executor memory?
Make sure your yarn.site looks exactly the same on your master and worker containers in the moment of starting the service.
It seems like you might edited it only on the master, which is a possible source of this confusion. As a general rule of thumb, all the config files (and many other things) must look exactly the same on all the machines in the cluster.
I want to process several idependent csv files of similar sizes (100 MB) in parallel with PySpark.
I'm running PySpark on a single machine:
spark.driver.memory 20g
spark.executor.memory 2g
local[1]
File content:
type (has the same value within each csv), timestamp, price
First I tested it on one csv (note I used 35 different window functions):
logData = spark.read.csv("TypeA.csv", header=False,schema=schema)
// Compute moving avg. I used 35 different moving averages.
w = (Window.partitionBy("type").orderBy(f.col("timestamp").cast("long")).rangeBetween(-24*7*3600 * i, 0))
logData = logData.withColumn("moving_avg", f.avg("price").over(w))
// Some other simple operations... No Agg, no sort
logData.write.parquet("res.pr")
This works great. However, i had two issues with scaling this job:
I tried to increase number of window functions to 50 the job OOMs. Not sure why PySpark doesn't spill to disk in this case, since window functions are independent of each other
I tried to run the job for 2 CSV files, it also OOMs. It is also not clear why it is not spilled to disk, since the window functions are basically partitioned by CSV files, so they are independent.
The question is why PySpark doesn't spill to disk in these two cases to prevent OOM, or how can I hint the Spark to do it?
If your machine cannot run all of these you can do that in sequence and write the data of each bulk of files before loading the next bulk.
I'm not sure if this is what you mean but you can try hint spark to write some of the data to your disk instead of keep it on RAM with:
df.persist(StorageLevel.MEMORY_AND_DISK)
Update if it helps
In theory, you could process all these 600 files in one single machine. Spark should spill to disk when meemory is not enough. But there're some points to consider:
As the logic involves window agg, which results in heavy shuffle operation. You need to check whether OOM happened on map or reduce phase. Map phase process each partition of file, then write shuffle output into some file. Then reduce phase need to fetch all these shuffle output from all map tasks. It's obvious that in your case you can't hold all map tasks running.
So it's highly likely that OOM happened on map phase. If this is the case, it means the memory per core can't process one signle partition of file. Please be aware that spark will do rough estimation of memory usage, then do spill if it thinks it should be. As the estatimation is not accurate, so it's still possible OOM. You can tune partition size by below configs:
spark.sql.files.maxPartitionBytes (default 128MB)
Usaually, 128M input needs 2GB heap with total 4G executor memory as
executor JVM heap execution memory (0.5 of total executor memory) =
(total executor memory - executor.memoryOverhead (default 0.1)) * spark.memory.storageFraction (0.6)
You can post all your configs in Spark UI for further investigation.
I've noticed strange behavior when running a pyspark application with spark 2.0. In the first step in my script involving a reduceByKey (and thus shuffle) operation, I observe that the amount the shuffle writes is roughly in line with my expectations, but that much more spills occur than I had expected. I tried to avoid these spills by increasing the amount of memory assigned per executor up to 8x the original amount, but see basically no difference in the amount spilled. Strangely, I also see that while this stage is running, hardly any of the assigned storage memory is used (as reported in the executors tab in the spark web UI).
I saw this earlier question, which led me to believe that increasing executor memory might help avoid the spills: How to optimize shuffle spill in Apache Spark application
. This leads me to believe that some hard limit is leading to the spills, and not the spark.shuffle.memoryFraction parameter. Does such a hard limit exist, possibly among HDFS parameters? Otherwise, what could be done to avoid spills besides increasing executor memory?
Many thanks, R
Spilling behavior in PySpark is controlled using spark.python.worker.memory:
Amount of memory to use per python worker process during aggregation, in the same format as JVM memory strings (e.g. 512m, 2g). If the memory used during aggregation goes above this amount, it will spill the data into disks.
which is by default set to 512MB. Moreover PySpark uses its own reducing mechanism with External(GroupBy|Sorter|Merger) and exhibits slightly different behavior than its native counterpart.
I'm running a 5 node Spark cluster on AWS EMR each sized m3.xlarge (1 master 4 slaves). I successfully ran through a 146Mb bzip2 compressed CSV file and ended up with a perfectly aggregated result.
Now I'm trying to process a ~5GB bzip2 CSV file on this cluster but I'm receiving this error:
16/11/23 17:29:53 WARN TaskSetManager: Lost task 49.2 in stage 6.0 (TID xxx, xxx.xxx.xxx.compute.internal): ExecutorLostFailure (executor 16 exited caused by one of the running tasks) Reason: Container killed by YARN for exceeding memory limits. 10.4 GB of 10.4 GB physical memory used. Consider boosting spark.yarn.executor.memoryOverhead.
I'm confused as to why I'm getting a ~10.5GB memory limit on a ~75GB cluster (15GB per 3m.xlarge instance)...
Here is my EMR config:
[
{
"classification":"spark-env",
"properties":{
},
"configurations":[
{
"classification":"export",
"properties":{
"PYSPARK_PYTHON":"python34"
},
"configurations":[
]
}
]
},
{
"classification":"spark",
"properties":{
"maximizeResourceAllocation":"true"
},
"configurations":[
]
}
]
From what I've read, setting the maximizeResourceAllocation property should tell EMR to configure Spark to fully utilize all resources available on the cluster. Ie, I should have ~75GB of memory available... So why am I getting a ~10.5GB memory limit error?
Here is the code I'm running:
def sessionize(raw_data, timeout):
# https://www.dataiku.com/learn/guide/code/reshaping_data/sessionization.html
window = (pyspark.sql.Window.partitionBy("user_id", "site_id")
.orderBy("timestamp"))
diff = (pyspark.sql.functions.lag(raw_data.timestamp, 1)
.over(window))
time_diff = (raw_data.withColumn("time_diff", raw_data.timestamp - diff)
.withColumn("new_session", pyspark.sql.functions.when(pyspark.sql.functions.col("time_diff") >= timeout.seconds, 1).otherwise(0)))
window = (pyspark.sql.Window.partitionBy("user_id", "site_id")
.orderBy("timestamp")
.rowsBetween(-1, 0))
sessions = (time_diff.withColumn("session_id", pyspark.sql.functions.concat_ws("_", "user_id", "site_id", pyspark.sql.functions.sum("new_session").over(window))))
return sessions
def aggregate_sessions(sessions):
median = pyspark.sql.functions.udf(lambda x: statistics.median(x))
aggregated = sessions.groupBy(pyspark.sql.functions.col("session_id")).agg(
pyspark.sql.functions.first("site_id").alias("site_id"),
pyspark.sql.functions.first("user_id").alias("user_id"),
pyspark.sql.functions.count("id").alias("hits"),
pyspark.sql.functions.min("timestamp").alias("start"),
pyspark.sql.functions.max("timestamp").alias("finish"),
median(pyspark.sql.functions.collect_list("foo")).alias("foo"),
)
return aggregated
spark_context = pyspark.SparkContext(appName="process-raw-data")
spark_session = pyspark.sql.SparkSession(spark_context)
raw_data = spark_session.read.csv(sys.argv[1],
header=True,
inferSchema=True)
# Windowing doesn't seem to play nicely with TimestampTypes.
#
# Should be able to do this within the ``spark.read.csv`` call, I'd
# think. Need to look into it.
convert_to_unix = pyspark.sql.functions.udf(lambda s: arrow.get(s).timestamp)
raw_data = raw_data.withColumn("timestamp",
convert_to_unix(pyspark.sql.functions.col("timestamp")))
sessions = sessionize(raw_data, SESSION_TIMEOUT)
aggregated = aggregate_sessions(sessions)
aggregated.foreach(save_session)
Basically, nothing more than windowing and a groupBy to aggregate the data.
It starts with a few of those errors, and towards halting increases in the amount of the same error.
I've tried running spark-submit with --conf spark.yarn.executor.memoryOverhead but that doesn't seem to solve the problem either.
I feel your pain..
We had similar issues of running out of memory with Spark on YARN. We have five 64GB, 16 core VMs and regardless of what we set spark.yarn.executor.memoryOverhead to, we just couldn't get enough memory for these tasks -- they would eventually die no matter how much memory we would give them. And this as a relatively straight-forward Spark application that was causing this to happen.
We figured out that the physical memory usage was quite low on the VMs but the virtual memory usage was extremely high (despite the logs complaining about physical memory). We set yarn.nodemanager.vmem-check-enabled in yarn-site.xml to false and our containers were no longer killed, and the application appeared to work as expected.
Doing more research, I found the answer to why this happens here: http://web.archive.org/web/20190806000138/https://mapr.com/blog/best-practices-yarn-resource-management/
Since on Centos/RHEL 6 there are aggressive allocation of virtual memory due to OS behavior, you should disable virtual memory checker or increase yarn.nodemanager.vmem-pmem-ratio to a relatively larger value.
That page had a link to a very useful page from IBM: https://web.archive.org/web/20170703001345/https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/kevgrig/entry/linux_glibc_2_10_rhel_6_malloc_may_show_excessive_virtual_memory_usage?lang=en
In summary, glibc > 2.10 changed its memory allocation. And although huge amounts of virtual memory being allocated isn't the end of the world, it doesn't work with the default settings of YARN.
Instead of setting yarn.nodemanager.vmem-check-enabled to false, you could also play with setting the MALLOC_ARENA_MAX environment variable to a low number in hadoop-env.sh. This bug report has helpful information about that: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7154
I recommend reading through both pages -- the information is very handy.
If you're not using spark-submit, and you're looking for another way to specify the yarn.nodemanager.vmem-check-enabled parameter mentioned by Duff, here are 2 other ways:
Method 2
If you're using a JSON Configuration file (that you pass to the AWS CLI or to your boto3 script), you'll have to add the following configuration:
[{
"Classification": "yarn-site",
"Properties": {
"yarn.nodemanager.vmem-check-enabled": "false"
}
}]
Method 3
If you use the EMR console, add the following configuration:
classification=yarn-site,properties=[yarn.nodemanager.vmem-check-enabled=false]
See,
I had the same problem in a huge cluster that I'm working now. The problem will not be solved to adding memory to the worker. Sometimes in process aggregation spark will use more memory than it has and the spark jobs will start to use off-heap memory.
One simple example is:
If you have a dataset that you need to reduceByKey it will, sometimes, agregate more data in one worker than other, and if this data exeeds the memory of one worker you get that error message.
Adding the option spark.yarn.executor.memoryOverhead will help you if you set for 50% of the memory used for the worker (just for test, and see if it works, you can add less with more tests).
But you need to understand how Spark works with the Memory Allocation in the cluster:
The more common way Spark uses 75% of the machine memory. The rest goes to SO.
Spark has two types of memory during the execution. One part is for execution and the other is the storage. Execution is used for Shuffles, Joins, Aggregations and Etc. The storage is used for caching and propagating data accross the cluster.
One good thing about memory allocation, if you are not using cache in your execution you can set the spark to use that sotorage space to work with execution to avoid in part the OOM error. As you can see this in documentation of spark:
This design ensures several desirable properties. First, applications that do not use caching can use the entire space for execution, obviating unnecessary disk spills. Second, applications that do use caching can reserve a minimum storage space (R) where their data blocks are immune to being evicted. Lastly, this approach provides reasonable out-of-the-box performance for a variety of workloads without requiring user expertise of how memory is divided internally.
But how can we use that?
You can change some configurations, Add the MemoryOverhead configuration to your job call but, consider add this too: spark.memory.fraction change for 0.8 or 0.85 and reduce the spark.memory.storageFraction to 0.35 or 0.2.
Other configurations can help, but it need to check in your case. Se all these configuration here.
Now, what helps in My case.
I have a cluster with 2.5K workers and 2.5TB of RAM. And we were facing OOM error like yours. We just increase the spark.yarn.executor.memoryOverhead to 2048. And we enable the dynamic allocation. And when we call the job, we don't set the memory for the workers, we leave that for the Spark to decide. We just set the Overhead.
But for some tests for my small cluster, changing the size of execution and storage memory. That solved the problem.
Try repartition. It works in my case.
The dataframe was not so big at the very beginning when it was loaded with write.csv(). The data file amounted to be 10 MB or so, as may required say totally several 100 MB memory for each processing task in executor.
I checked the number of partitions to be 2 at the time.
Then it grew like a snowball during the following operations joining with other tables, adding new columns. And then I ran into the memory exceeding limits issue at a certain step.
I checked the number of partitions, it was still 2, derived from the original data frame I guess.
So I tried to repartition it at the very beginning, and there was no problem anymore.
I have not read many materials about Spark and YARN yet. What I do know is that there are executors in nodes. An executor could handle many tasks depending on the resources. My guess is one partition would be atomically mapped to one task. And its volume determines the resource usage. Spark could not slice it if one partition grows too big.
A reasonable strategy is to determine the nodes and container memory first, either 10GB or 5GB. Ideally, both could serve any data processing job, just a matter of time. Given the 5GB memory setting, the reasonable row for one partition you find, say is 1000 after testing (it won't fail any steps during the processing), we could do it as the following pseudo code:
RWS_PER_PARTITION = 1000
input_df = spark.write.csv("file_uri", *other_args)
total_rows = input_df.count()
original_num_partitions = input_df.getNumPartitions()
numPartitions = max(total_rows/RWS_PER_PARTITION, original_num_partitions)
input_df = input_df.repartition(numPartitions)
Hope it helps!
I had the same issue on small cluster running relatively small job on spark 2.3.1.
The job reads parquet file, removes duplicates using groupBy/agg/first then sorts and writes new parquet. It processed 51 GB of parquet files on 4 nodes (4 vcores, 32Gb RAM).
The job was constantly failing on aggregation stage. I wrote bash script watch executors memory usage and found out that in the middle of the stage one random executor starts taking double memory for a few seconds. When I correlated time of this moment with GC logs it matched with full GC that empties big amount of memory.
At last I understood that the problem is related somehow to GC. ParallelGC and G1 causes this issue constantly but ConcMarkSweepGC improves the situation. The issue appears only with small amount of partitions. I ran the job on EMR where OpenJDK 64-Bit (build 25.171-b10) was installed. I don't know the root cause of the issue, it could be related to JVM or operating system. But it is definitely not related to heap or off-heap usage in my case.
UPDATE1
Tried Oracle HotSpot, the issue is reproduced.
I am tuning an application running on Spark 1.5.2. I ran 2 times the exact same script, but with different driver.memory parameter.
First time : driver.memory = 15g / Execution time : 6,1h
Second time : driver.memory = 2g / Execution time : 5,7h
The goal of the script is only making join on a same table and iterate on it with a newer table, before saving it in a Hive table.
I though the more memory we give, the better it is. But this idea is kind of false according to the tests... Is really the driver memory responsible of it ? Or is the process which run +/- randomly ...?
It does not matter if your driver is running on standalone machine(where no executor is running). Try to increase driver memory if you are using collect/take actions otherwise increase executor memory for better performance.
If you are not using cache, try to increase spark.shuffle.memoryFraction.
See spark doc for more details: https://spark.apache.org/docs/1.5.2/configuration.html