I think i need to re-frame the question a bit. Yes CS supports multiple jobs in parallel but of different users. If i am submitting 3 different jobs for a same user at the same time, they are always executed in a FIFO manner. Am i correct?
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Harsh J <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote: > The CS does support running jobs in parallel. Are you observing just > the UI or are also noticing a FIFO behavior in logs where assignments > can be seen with timestamps? > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Jagmohan Chauhan > <simplefunduare .mn...@gmail.com <simplefundumn...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi All > > > > Can someone please reply to my queries? > > > > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Jagmohan Chauhan < > simplefundumn...@gmail.com > >> wrote: > > > >> Thanks Harsh. > >> > >> I have a few more questions. > >> > >> Q1: I found it in my experiments using CS that for any user , its next > job > >> does not start until its current one is finished. Is it true and are > there > >> any exceptions and if true then why is it so? I I did not find any such > >> condition in the implementation of CS. > >> > >> Q2: The concept of reserved slots is true only if speculative execution > >> is on. Am i correct ? If yes,then the code dealing with reserved slots > wont > >> be executed if speculative execution is off? > >> > >> PS: I am working on MRv1. > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 2:41 AM, Harsh J <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Jagmohan Chauhan < > >>> simplefundumn...@gmail.com > >>> > wrote: > >>> > >>> > Hi > >>> > > >>> > I am going through the Capacity Scheduler implementation. There is > one > >>> > thing i did not understand clearly. > >>> > > >>> > >>> Are you reading the YARN CapacityScheduler or the older, MRv1 one? I'd > >>> suggest reading the newer one for any implementation or research goals, > >>> for > >>> it to be more current and future-applicable. > >>> > >>> > >>> > 1. Does the o ff-switch task refers to a task in which data has to be > >>> > fetched over the network. It means its not node-local ? > >>> > > >>> > >>> Off-switch would imply off-rack, i.e. not node local, nor rack-local. > >>> > >>> > >>> > 2. Does off-switch task includes only the tasks for which map input > >>> has to > >>> > be fetched from a node on a different rack across the switch or it > also > >>> > includes task where data has to be fetched from another node on same > >>> rack > >>> > on same switch? > >>> > > >>> > >>> A task's input split is generally supposed to define all locations of > >>> available inputs. If the CS is unable to schedule to any of those > >>> locations, nor their racks, then it schedules an off-rack (see above) > task > >>> which has to pull the input from a different rack. > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > Thanks and Regards > >>> > Jagmohan Chauhan > >>> > MSc student,CS > >>> > Univ. of Saskatchewan > >>> > IEEE Graduate Student Member > >>> > > >>> > http://homepage.usask.ca/~jac735/ > >>> > > >>> > >>> Feel free to post any further impl. related questions! :) > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Harsh J > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks and Regards > >> Jagmohan Chauhan > >> MSc student,CS > >> Univ. of Saskatchewan > >> IEEE Graduate Student Member > >> > >> http://homepage.usask.ca/~jac735/ > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Thanks and Regards > > Jagmohan Chauhan > > MSc student,CS > > Univ. of Saskatchewan > > IEEE Graduate Student Member > > > > http://homepage.usask.ca/~jac735/ > > > > -- > Harsh J > -- Thanks and Regards Jagmohan Chauhan MSc student,CS Univ. of Saskatchewan IEEE Graduate Student Member http://homepage.usask.ca/~jac735/
