pinterestFeb 17, 2026

Drastically Reducing Out-of-Memory Errors in Apache Spark at Pinterest (opens in new tab)

Pinterest developed **Auto Memory Retries** to reduce Spark out-of-memory failures without permanently assigning oversized executors to every task. The system detects OOM failures and retries affected tasks with progressively larger resource profiles, reducing both on-call incidents and wasted compute. Instead of tuning every job for its peak memory demand, Pinterest can size jobs around typical usage while handling exceptional tasks elastically. ## Pinterest’s Spark Environment - Pinterest processes more than **90,000 Spark jobs daily** across tens of thousands of nodes. - Its infrastructure includes: - Kubernetes clusters - Spark 3.2, with Spark 3.5 adoption underway - Apache Celeborn for shuffle - Apache YuniKorn for scheduling - Apache Gluten and Meta’s Velox for acceleration - Archer, Pinterest’s internal submission service - More than **4.6% of job failures** were caused by OOM errors. ## Why Manual Memory Tuning Was Insufficient - Pinterest’s clusters are memory-bound, so simply increasing executor sizes is expensive and difficult. - Automatic tuning generally reduces executor memory to match historical usage and improve resource efficiency. - Manual tuning can work, but requires substantial expertise because: - Different stages perform different operations. - Individual tasks may have very different memory needs because of data skew. - Configurations that work for most tasks may fail for a small number of high-memory tasks. - Auto Memory Retries allow jobs to target approximately their **P90 memory usage**, while automatically giving unusually demanding tasks more capacity. ## How Spark Executor Memory Works - An executor’s memory and CPU capacity determine how many tasks can run concurrently. - By default, each CPU core provides a task slot. - For example, with `spark.task.cpus=2`, an executor with two usable task slots and 8 GB of memory provides roughly 4 GB per task on average. - Memory is shared, so one task may temporarily use more than its average allocation if another uses less. - An OOM occurs when the combined memory usage of concurrent tasks exceeds the executor’s available memory. ## Auto Memory Retries Design Pinterest modified Spark’s scheduling loop so individual tasks can use resource profiles different from their parent `TaskSet`. - Each task can store an optional `taskRpId` identifying its retry resource profile. - Pinterest creates immutable retry profiles at **2x, 3x, and 4x** the base profile. - If off-heap memory is enabled, it is scaled as well. - Retries use a hybrid strategy: - **First retry:** Double `cpus per task`, allowing the task to run on an existing executor with fewer concurrent tasks. - **Later retry:** Launch a physically larger executor if the task still fails or already requires the entire executor. - The approach prioritizes reusing existing executors before provisioning larger ones. ## Changes to Spark Internals Pinterest extended core Spark components through Pinterest-specific subclasses rather than using a listener-only implementation. - **Task** - Stores the optional task resource profile ID. - **TaskSetManager** - Tracks tasks with non-default profiles. - Assigns the next larger retry profile after an OOM. - **TaskSchedulerImpl** - Allows tasks with increased CPU requirements to run on standard executors. - **ExecutorAllocationManager** - Tracks pending tasks by retry profile. - Requests larger executors when physical memory is required. - The feature-specific classes are loaded only when Auto Memory Retries is enabled. - The Spark UI was updated to display each task’s resource profile ID. ## Handling Tasks After an OOM - When a task fails on an executor with more than one core, its first retry doubles `spark.task.cpus`. - Other tasks in the same stage or future stages are unaffected. - Spark cannot reliably determine which concurrent task caused the executor-level OOM. - As a result, Pinterest treats **all tasks running on the terminated executor** as having failed due to OOM and routes them to retries that do not share the executor with other tasks. ## Practical Conclusion Pinterest’s approach makes executor sizing elastic at the task level: configure jobs for normal memory usage, then progressively increase resources only for tasks that need them. This can reduce OOM-related failures and operational load while avoiding the cost of running every task on oversized executors.

apache-sparkk8smemory-managementresource-allocation+4

pinterestFeb 5, 2026

Next Generation DB Ingestion at Pinterest (opens in new tab)

Pinterest replaced fragmented, batch-oriented database ingestion with a unified Change Data Capture (CDC) framework. The new architecture uses Debezium/TiCDC, Kafka, Flink, Spark, and Iceberg to process only changed records, reducing latency from over 24 hours to minutes while lowering infrastructure costs. It also provides native row-level deletion, scalable operations, and improved compliance. ## Problems with the Legacy System - Batch workflows often delayed updates by more than 24 hours. - Full-table processing was inefficient because many tables changed by less than 5% each day. - Lack of row-level deletion support complicated data compliance. - Multiple independently maintained pipelines created operational complexity and inconsistent data quality. ## Unified CDC-Based Architecture - Supports MySQL, TiDB, and KVStore. - Captures database changes through a generic CDC service and publishes them to Kafka, typically in under one second. - Flink processes events in near real time and stores them in append-only CDC Iceberg tables on S3. - Spark jobs run periodically—often every 15 minutes—to merge recent changes into base Iceberg tables. - A bootstrap pipeline initializes base tables from historical database dumps. - Maintenance jobs handle compaction and snapshot expiration. - The framework is designed for at-least-once processing, petabyte-scale data, thousands of pipelines, and YAML-based configuration. ## CDC Tables and Base Tables - CDC tables act as time-series ledgers containing every change event. - CDC data typically becomes available within five minutes. - Base tables mirror the current state of the source database while retaining historical records. - Base-table latency is generally between 15 minutes and one hour. ## Upserting Changes into Base Tables - Spark first identifies the newest event for each primary key. - Events are ranked by timestamp and GTID, then deduplicated. - Iceberg’s `MERGE INTO` applies the resulting changes: - Deletes matching records when the event represents a deletion. - Updates existing records. - Inserts new records unless the event is a deletion. - The process uses a recent CDC window and a processing watermark to avoid reprocessing unnecessary data. ## Choosing Merge-on-Read - Pinterest standardized on Iceberg’s Merge-on-Read (MOR) strategy. - Copy-on-Write (COW) was rejected for most workloads because: - It requires more computation during writes. - It produces substantially larger replacement files, increasing storage costs. - MOR better balances update performance and storage efficiency for frequent incremental changes. ## Partitioning for Faster Upserts - Large base tables can be partitioned using a hash bucket of the primary key. - For example, `bucket(100, id)` distributes records across 100 partitions. - This allows Spark to process partitions in parallel and reduces the data scanned or rewritten during merges. - Iceberg tables are configured with format version 2, identifier fields, merge-on-read update and delete modes, and target file sizes. ## Small-File Challenge - Bucketing improved parallelism but caused each upsert to generate many small files within partitions. - The article indicates that Pinterest investigated this bottleneck and introduced further optimizations, though the supplied excerpt ends before describing them. Pinterest’s CDC-based design provides a substantially faster and more efficient alternative to full-table batch ingestion. Teams adopting a similar system should combine incremental CDC processing with partitioning, merge-on-read storage, bootstrapping, and ongoing file-maintenance strategies.

apache-sparkapache-kafkamysqlapache-iceberg+4

pinterestJan 13, 2026

PinLanding: Turn Billions of Products into Instant Shopping Collections with Multimodal AI (opens in new tab)

PinLanding is a production pipeline for turning billions of products into searchable shopping collections using multimodal AI. Rather than relying mainly on historical queries or manual curation, it derives structured product attributes from images and metadata, then aligns those attributes with real user search behavior. The system combines multimodal LLMs, embedding-based consolidation, a CLIP-style classifier, and distributed infrastructure to produce scalable, precise shopping feeds. ## Understanding Shopping Intent - Pinterest analyzes search history, autocomplete use, filters, and browsing paths to estimate shopping demand. - Existing systems handle high-volume queries such as “black cocktail dress” well, but provide weaker coverage for: - Long-tail queries - Conversational requests - Contextual intents such as “what to wear for an Italian summer vacation” - The analysis identifies: - Product areas with strong demand but poor collection coverage - Important attribute dimensions, including color, occasion, style, fit, price, and brand - The goal is to expand and improve collection coverage, not replace query understanding. ## Generating and Curating Shopping Topics - Each product is represented by an image plus metadata such as title, description, merchant tags, and price. - A vision-language model generates normalized key-value attributes rather than free-form descriptions. - Raw model output has high recall but produces: - Excessively specific attributes - Near-duplicates such as “boho,” “bohemian,” and “boho-chic” - Sparse attributes that apply to very few products - PinLanding builds a compact vocabulary through: - Frequency filtering to remove rarely useful attributes - Embedding-based clustering to merge semantically similar terms - Manual and LLM-assisted review - An LLM judge evaluates generated topics for semantic coherence, realistic shopping intent, and alignment with natural search phrasing. ## Scalable Attribute Assignment - Running the vision-language model over every product is too expensive and operationally fragile. - PinLanding trains a CLIP-inspired dual encoder: - One encoder embeds product images and text - Another embeds attribute phrases - Matching product-attribute pairs are trained as positives, while mismatches are negatives - A bidirectional contrastive loss aligns related products and attributes. - At inference, products and attributes are embedded once, and attributes are assigned when similarity exceeds a calibrated threshold. - This produces fewer distinct attributes while increasing the average number assigned to each product, creating a denser and more consistent attribute graph. ## Distributed Feed Construction - Ray handles large-scale batch inference across millions of products and topics. - The pipeline separates: - CPU-based image and metadata loading, tokenization, and serialization - GPU-based classifier inference - Streaming allows preprocessing and inference to overlap, while heterogeneous CPU and GPU clusters can scale independently. - The classifier pipeline reportedly completes in about 12 hours using eight NVIDIA A100 GPUs, at an estimated cost of roughly $500 per training run. - Feed construction uses approximate-nearest-neighbor techniques and strict attribute matching. - Topics are represented as attribute tuples, such as: - Category: dress - Color: yellow - Season: summer - Occasion: party - Apache Spark computes topic-product relevance using shared attributes and confidence weights, with partitioning and overlap filters reducing unnecessary candidate comparisons. The core recommendation is to combine user-behavior signals with content-first multimodal modeling. This approach can expand shopping coverage into conversational and long-tail intents while remaining practical through attribute consolidation, contrastive retrieval, and distributed inference.

apache-sparkmultimodal-aicontrastive-learningclip+4