[SPARK-58021][CONNECT] Reap orphaned local pool members - #58247
Open
ericm-db wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
This was referenced Aug 24, 2026
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 is layer 5 of the nine-PR local Connect pool stack:
#57684 -> #57685 -> #57907 -> #57686 -> #58247 -> #57687 -> #58248 -> #57102 -> #57688
Until #57686 merges, GitHub shows its cumulative diff. The review unit introduced here is commit
68833332d27.This layer adds janitor and orphan recovery on top of normal retirement:
Acquisition, forceful purge, SparkSession integration, and warmup remain in later PRs.
Why are the changes needed?
Pool members outlive individual Python call frames and can be orphaned by crashes or SIGKILL.
Separating recovery from normal release makes the adversarial state matrix and its idempotency
contract reviewable without acquisition and user-facing orchestration.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No. The pool is not wired into SparkSession in this layer.
How was this patch tested?
Added thirteen focused tests at this layer, bringing the suite to 46 tests. They cover pending
launch failures, PID reuse, launch process groups, stale conf state, unusable and idle members,
malformed records, dead clients, and member-directory garbage collection.
At the stack tip, the equivalent direct
unittestinvocation passed all 56 pool tests, includingthe two real-server E2E tests.
The rebuilt commit passed Python AST parsing,
git diff --check, and changed-file ASCII and100-column checks.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) and OpenAI Codex (GPT-5)