Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
Honestly your opinion is welcome, this kind of discussions are great in this small traffic dev list ;-) -- Javi Roman Twitter: @javiromanrh GitHub: github.com/javiroman Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info Apache Id: javiroman On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 8:55 PM yuliya Feldman wrote: > > I am not saying it's crazy. I was voicing my opinion. Isn't it what was the > purpose of the discussion? > It's definitely great to have UI that manages all the YARN clusters, but it's > not like UI/Web service has to be coupled/collocated with any of the Myriad > particular YARN version daemons. > It's great if you would provide write up with pros and cons for your approach > or any alternative approaches. > > > On Tuesday, September 24, 2019, 11:38:13 AM PDT, Javi Roman > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:58 PM yuliya Feldman > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > Again I apologize for the late reply. > > I think I replied to the thread, but will add more direct notes here > > What you are proposing is to have yet another daemon that would start Yarn > > Clusters on demand within Mesos framework. > > Meaning - it would be another layer of abstraction. In this case that new > > layer would need to behave as second level scheduler and deal with third > > level scheduler(s) (RMs) to propagate offers from Mesos and keep track, etc. > > I am sure you can somehow use concept of Capacity and/or FairShare > > scheduler in your new layer to do the job. I am just not very much > > convinced that 3 layers of scheduling will be easy to > > maintain/reconcile/etc. > > Again - if I understand your design correctly. > > Would be great if you do a small write up with the proposal and have some > > simple diagram of services interactions. > > Just my 2c. > > Thanks,Yuliya > > Great, I wil do a diagram! > > Only for clarify: > > Myriad is registered as framework in Mesos master. The same thread > start the API server and the user interface. By means the user > interface you select the YARN version to run, and the scheduler get > resources from master for running RM and NMs. So you con manage as > many YARN schedulers you want. YARN as a Service. > > Maybe I am missing the point, bu I don't feel this is something so > strange, or so crazy! > > > >On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 11:55:07 PM PDT, Oscar Fernandez > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 - > > Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. > > > > In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework > > from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. > > > > I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a > > reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad > > from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register > > on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, > > allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different > > versions. > > > > Thank you > > >
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
I am not saying it's crazy. I was voicing my opinion. Isn't it what was the purpose of the discussion? It's definitely great to have UI that manages all the YARN clusters, but it's not like UI/Web service has to be coupled/collocated with any of the Myriad particular YARN version daemons. It's great if you would provide write up with pros and cons for your approach or any alternative approaches. On Tuesday, September 24, 2019, 11:38:13 AM PDT, Javi Roman wrote: On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:58 PM yuliya Feldman wrote: > > Hello, > Again I apologize for the late reply. > I think I replied to the thread, but will add more direct notes here > What you are proposing is to have yet another daemon that would start Yarn > Clusters on demand within Mesos framework. > Meaning - it would be another layer of abstraction. In this case that new > layer would need to behave as second level scheduler and deal with third > level scheduler(s) (RMs) to propagate offers from Mesos and keep track, etc. > I am sure you can somehow use concept of Capacity and/or FairShare scheduler > in your new layer to do the job. I am just not very much convinced that 3 > layers of scheduling will be easy to maintain/reconcile/etc. > Again - if I understand your design correctly. > Would be great if you do a small write up with the proposal and have some > simple diagram of services interactions. > Just my 2c. > Thanks,Yuliya Great, I wil do a diagram! Only for clarify: Myriad is registered as framework in Mesos master. The same thread start the API server and the user interface. By means the user interface you select the YARN version to run, and the scheduler get resources from master for running RM and NMs. So you con manage as many YARN schedulers you want. YARN as a Service. Maybe I am missing the point, bu I don't feel this is something so strange, or so crazy! > On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 11:55:07 PM PDT, Oscar Fernandez > wrote: > > Hi, > > I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 - > Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. > > In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework > from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. > > I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a > reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad > from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register > on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, > allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different > versions. > > Thank you >
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
It's true with one "but" you need a yet another scheduler in your service and it's not a trivial feat - if you want it to be fulfilling the purpose, otherwise Marathon as good as it is. As far as I remember Marathon has simple FIFO one (may be it evolved though). In any case - it was my opinion :). You guys know better and closer to it. Thanks,Yuliya On Tuesday, September 24, 2019, 11:32:32 AM PDT, Javi Roman wrote: On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:48 PM yuliya Feldman wrote: > > >>> I guess we are talking about the concept of multi-service scheduler Are you proposing to have a multi service scheduler? I thought that's what Mesos is for?What am I missing here? Yes is common in Mesos (IMHO): Marathon is a multi-service scheduler, Apache Aurora too. Please take a look here: https://mesosphere.github.io/dcos-commons/multi-service/ > On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 5:40 PM Yuliya wrote: > > > > Hello there, > > > > Sorry for late reply. > > > > Frankly speaking I don’t know original motivation , I would probably say > > that it started organically as a need. > > > > What do you mean by starting yarn from myriad? I believe myriad daemons > > encompass some functionality of yarn daemons, namely rm and nm, so it’s not > > yarn that starts myriad, but myriad daemons that play role of yarn daemons. > > Unless I am missing something here. > > > > Are you proposing to have the same myriad daemons starting different > > versions of yarn? > > I would consider different set of docker containers built with different > >versions of yarn would be better decoupling. I am open for discussion though. > > > > Thanks, > > Yuliya > > > > > > > > > On Sep 15, 2019, at 10:35 PM, Javi Roman wrote: > > > > > > Hi Oscar, > > > > > > I have to say I don't know the initial motivation of this design. You > > > are right the way of starting Myriad, strongly coupled to YARN is a > > > little bit weird. > > > Because of lack of activity of the initial committers, this is a > > > question that probably we never get a clear answer. > > > > > > By the way, your proposal, according with MYRIAD-295 is, from my > > > understanding, the right way to go ahead with the project. > > > > > > This new design is totally aligned with the further Myriad UI design > > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-279). > > > > > > The document design of this new UI here: > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/16gA67RXoPK24OIxDMNNhuYS8ioScI1eOBR-XMMPjWQE/edit?usp=sharing > > > -- > > > Javi Roman > > > > > > Twitter: @javiromanrh > > > GitHub: github.com/javiroman > > > Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman > > > Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info > > > Apache Id: javiroman > > > > > >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:55 AM Oscar Fernandez > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 > > >> - > > >> Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. > > >> > > >> In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework > > >> from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. > > >> > > >> I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a > > >> reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of > > >> Myriad > > >> from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would > > >> register > > >> on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, > > >> allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with > > >> different > > >> versions. > > >> > > >> Thank you > >
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:58 PM yuliya Feldman wrote: > > Hello, > Again I apologize for the late reply. > I think I replied to the thread, but will add more direct notes here > What you are proposing is to have yet another daemon that would start Yarn > Clusters on demand within Mesos framework. > Meaning - it would be another layer of abstraction. In this case that new > layer would need to behave as second level scheduler and deal with third > level scheduler(s) (RMs) to propagate offers from Mesos and keep track, etc. > I am sure you can somehow use concept of Capacity and/or FairShare scheduler > in your new layer to do the job. I am just not very much convinced that 3 > layers of scheduling will be easy to maintain/reconcile/etc. > Again - if I understand your design correctly. > Would be great if you do a small write up with the proposal and have some > simple diagram of services interactions. > Just my 2c. > Thanks,Yuliya Great, I wil do a diagram! Only for clarify: Myriad is registered as framework in Mesos master. The same thread start the API server and the user interface. By means the user interface you select the YARN version to run, and the scheduler get resources from master for running RM and NMs. So you con manage as many YARN schedulers you want. YARN as a Service. Maybe I am missing the point, bu I don't feel this is something so strange, or so crazy! > On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 11:55:07 PM PDT, Oscar Fernandez > wrote: > > Hi, > > I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 - > Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. > > In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework > from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. > > I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a > reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad > from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register > on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, > allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different > versions. > > Thank you >
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:48 PM yuliya Feldman wrote: > > >>> I guess we are talking about the concept of multi-service scheduler Are you proposing to have a multi service scheduler? I thought that's what Mesos is for?What am I missing here? Yes is common in Mesos (IMHO): Marathon is a multi-service scheduler, Apache Aurora too. Please take a look here: https://mesosphere.github.io/dcos-commons/multi-service/ > On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 5:40 PM Yuliya wrote: > > > > Hello there, > > > > Sorry for late reply. > > > > Frankly speaking I don’t know original motivation , I would probably say > > that it started organically as a need. > > > > What do you mean by starting yarn from myriad? I believe myriad daemons > > encompass some functionality of yarn daemons, namely rm and nm, so it’s not > > yarn that starts myriad, but myriad daemons that play role of yarn daemons. > > Unless I am missing something here. > > > > Are you proposing to have the same myriad daemons starting different > > versions of yarn? > > I would consider different set of docker containers built with different > > versions of yarn would be better decoupling. I am open for discussion > > though. > > > > Thanks, > > Yuliya > > > > > > > > > On Sep 15, 2019, at 10:35 PM, Javi Roman wrote: > > > > > > Hi Oscar, > > > > > > I have to say I don't know the initial motivation of this design. You > > > are right the way of starting Myriad, strongly coupled to YARN is a > > > little bit weird. > > > Because of lack of activity of the initial committers, this is a > > > question that probably we never get a clear answer. > > > > > > By the way, your proposal, according with MYRIAD-295 is, from my > > > understanding, the right way to go ahead with the project. > > > > > > This new design is totally aligned with the further Myriad UI design > > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-279). > > > > > > The document design of this new UI here: > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/16gA67RXoPK24OIxDMNNhuYS8ioScI1eOBR-XMMPjWQE/edit?usp=sharing > > > -- > > > Javi Roman > > > > > > Twitter: @javiromanrh > > > GitHub: github.com/javiroman > > > Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman > > > Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info > > > Apache Id: javiroman > > > > > >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:55 AM Oscar Fernandez > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 > > >> - > > >> Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. > > >> > > >> In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework > > >> from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. > > >> > > >> I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a > > >> reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of > > >> Myriad > > >> from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would > > >> register > > >> on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, > > >> allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with > > >> different > > >> versions. > > >> > > >> Thank you > >
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
Hello, Again I apologize for the late reply. I think I replied to the thread, but will add more direct notes here What you are proposing is to have yet another daemon that would start Yarn Clusters on demand within Mesos framework. Meaning - it would be another layer of abstraction. In this case that new layer would need to behave as second level scheduler and deal with third level scheduler(s) (RMs) to propagate offers from Mesos and keep track, etc. I am sure you can somehow use concept of Capacity and/or FairShare scheduler in your new layer to do the job. I am just not very much convinced that 3 layers of scheduling will be easy to maintain/reconcile/etc. Again - if I understand your design correctly. Would be great if you do a small write up with the proposal and have some simple diagram of services interactions. Just my 2c. Thanks,Yuliya On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 11:55:07 PM PDT, Oscar Fernandez wrote: Hi, I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 - Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different versions. Thank you
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
>>> I guess we are talking about the concept of multi-service schedulerAre you >>>proposing to have a multi service scheduler? I thought that's what Mesos is >>>for?What am I missing here? Thanks,Yuliya On Tuesday, September 24, 2019, 10:00:39 AM PDT, Javi Roman wrote: I guess we are talking about the concept of multi-service scheduler, or one framework for multiple services, in our case multiple YARN services (different versions, and so on). Javi Roman Twitter: @javiromanrh GitHub: github.com/javiroman Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info Apache Id: javiroman On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 5:40 PM Yuliya wrote: > > Hello there, > > Sorry for late reply. > > Frankly speaking I don’t know original motivation , I would probably say that > it started organically as a need. > > What do you mean by starting yarn from myriad? I believe myriad daemons > encompass some functionality of yarn daemons, namely rm and nm, so it’s not > yarn that starts myriad, but myriad daemons that play role of yarn daemons. > Unless I am missing something here. > > Are you proposing to have the same myriad daemons starting different versions > of yarn? > I would consider different set of docker containers built with different >versions of yarn would be better decoupling. I am open for discussion though. > > Thanks, > Yuliya > > > > > On Sep 15, 2019, at 10:35 PM, Javi Roman wrote: > > > > Hi Oscar, > > > > I have to say I don't know the initial motivation of this design. You > > are right the way of starting Myriad, strongly coupled to YARN is a > > little bit weird. > > Because of lack of activity of the initial committers, this is a > > question that probably we never get a clear answer. > > > > By the way, your proposal, according with MYRIAD-295 is, from my > > understanding, the right way to go ahead with the project. > > > > This new design is totally aligned with the further Myriad UI design > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-279). > > > > The document design of this new UI here: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/16gA67RXoPK24OIxDMNNhuYS8ioScI1eOBR-XMMPjWQE/edit?usp=sharing > > -- > > Javi Roman > > > > Twitter: @javiromanrh > > GitHub: github.com/javiroman > > Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman > > Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info > > Apache Id: javiroman > > > >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:55 AM Oscar Fernandez > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 - > >> Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. > >> > >> In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework > >> from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. > >> > >> I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a > >> reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad > >> from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register > >> on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, > >> allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different > >> versions. > >> > >> Thank you >
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
I guess we are talking about the concept of multi-service scheduler, or one framework for multiple services, in our case multiple YARN services (different versions, and so on). Javi Roman Twitter: @javiromanrh GitHub: github.com/javiroman Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info Apache Id: javiroman On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 5:40 PM Yuliya wrote: > > Hello there, > > Sorry for late reply. > > Frankly speaking I don’t know original motivation , I would probably say that > it started organically as a need. > > What do you mean by starting yarn from myriad? I believe myriad daemons > encompass some functionality of yarn daemons, namely rm and nm, so it’s not > yarn that starts myriad, but myriad daemons that play role of yarn daemons. > Unless I am missing something here. > > Are you proposing to have the same myriad daemons starting different versions > of yarn? > I would consider different set of docker containers built with different > versions of yarn would be better decoupling. I am open for discussion though. > > Thanks, > Yuliya > > > > > On Sep 15, 2019, at 10:35 PM, Javi Roman wrote: > > > > Hi Oscar, > > > > I have to say I don't know the initial motivation of this design. You > > are right the way of starting Myriad, strongly coupled to YARN is a > > little bit weird. > > Because of lack of activity of the initial committers, this is a > > question that probably we never get a clear answer. > > > > By the way, your proposal, according with MYRIAD-295 is, from my > > understanding, the right way to go ahead with the project. > > > > This new design is totally aligned with the further Myriad UI design > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-279). > > > > The document design of this new UI here: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/16gA67RXoPK24OIxDMNNhuYS8ioScI1eOBR-XMMPjWQE/edit?usp=sharing > > -- > > Javi Roman > > > > Twitter: @javiromanrh > > GitHub: github.com/javiroman > > Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman > > Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info > > Apache Id: javiroman > > > >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:55 AM Oscar Fernandez > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 - > >> Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. > >> > >> In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework > >> from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. > >> > >> I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a > >> reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad > >> from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register > >> on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, > >> allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different > >> versions. > >> > >> Thank you >
Re: Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service
Hello there, Sorry for late reply. Frankly speaking I don’t know original motivation , I would probably say that it started organically as a need. What do you mean by starting yarn from myriad? I believe myriad daemons encompass some functionality of yarn daemons, namely rm and nm, so it’s not yarn that starts myriad, but myriad daemons that play role of yarn daemons. Unless I am missing something here. Are you proposing to have the same myriad daemons starting different versions of yarn? I would consider different set of docker containers built with different versions of yarn would be better decoupling. I am open for discussion though. Thanks, Yuliya > On Sep 15, 2019, at 10:35 PM, Javi Roman wrote: > > Hi Oscar, > > I have to say I don't know the initial motivation of this design. You > are right the way of starting Myriad, strongly coupled to YARN is a > little bit weird. > Because of lack of activity of the initial committers, this is a > question that probably we never get a clear answer. > > By the way, your proposal, according with MYRIAD-295 is, from my > understanding, the right way to go ahead with the project. > > This new design is totally aligned with the further Myriad UI design > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-279). > > The document design of this new UI here: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/16gA67RXoPK24OIxDMNNhuYS8ioScI1eOBR-XMMPjWQE/edit?usp=sharing > -- > Javi Roman > > Twitter: @javiromanrh > GitHub: github.com/javiroman > Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman > Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info > Apache Id: javiroman > >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:55 AM Oscar Fernandez wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 - >> Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service. >> >> In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework >> from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand. >> >> I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a >> reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad >> from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register >> on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants, >> allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different >> versions. >> >> Thank you
