[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5170?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12706990#action_12706990
]
Hemanth Yamijala commented on HADOOP-5170:
------------------------------------------
Matei, wanted to understand this a bit more..
Another use case that I heard of is the following: If I have a CPU bound job, I
may want to restrict the number of tasks that run on a node, so I can use the
cores all for myself. So, if I set mapred.max.maps.per.node for this job
appropriately, the patch makes sure that only those many tasks of this job are
scheduled on the node, even if slots are free.
However, another job that has no limits set can get scheduled on the free
slots. Then, the exclusiveness is not met, right ? So, is the above use case
not handled by this patch, or can it be accomplished in some way still.
> Set max map/reduce tasks on a per-job basis, either per-node or cluster-wide
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-5170
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5170
> Project: Hadoop Core
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: mapred
> Reporter: Jonathan Gray
> Attachments: tasklimits.patch
>
>
> There are a number of use cases for being able to do this. The focus of this
> jira should be on finding what would be the simplest to implement that would
> satisfy the most use cases.
> This could be implemented as either a per-node maximum or a cluster-wide
> maximum. It seems that for most uses, the former is preferable however
> either would fulfill the requirements of this jira.
> Some of the reasons for allowing this feature (mine and from others on list):
> - I have some very large CPU-bound jobs. I am forced to keep the max
> map/node limit at 2 or 3 (on a 4 core node) so that I do not starve the
> Datanode and Regionserver. I have other jobs that are network latency bound
> and would like to be able to run high numbers of them concurrently on each
> node. Though I can thread some jobs, there are some use cases that are
> difficult to thread (scanning from hbase) and there's significant complexity
> added to the job rather than letting hadoop handle the concurrency.
> - Poor assignment of tasks to nodes creates some situations where you have
> multiple reducers on a single node but other nodes that received none. A
> limit of 1 reducer per node for that job would prevent that from happening.
> (only works with per-node limit)
> - Poor mans MR job virtualization. Since we can limit a jobs resources, this
> gives much more control in allocating and dividing up resources of a large
> cluster. (makes most sense w/ cluster-wide limit)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
