> On Nov 1, 2016, at 9:35 AM, Madhusudhan Govindaraju <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hello Mangirish, > > Here is the text from Aurora's github page: > > --- > When and when not to use Aurora > Aurora can take over for most uses of software ... However, if you have very > specific scheduling requirements, or are building a system that looks like a > scheduler itself, you may want to explore developing your own framework. > --- > We believe Airavata will need a framework to customize scheduling policies > for different communities, and so instead of making big changes in Aurora, we > want to develop our own framework. > Hi Madhu, Pankaj,
New contributions and directions will be greatly welcome. Writing a new framework as a proof of concept or as an academic effort does not need much discussion, but if the goal is to deliver on a “production ready” scheduler then I think we need significant discussion and assessment of what the currents schedulers lack. Job management has lot of corner cases and it will take some collective substantial effort to work on the last 20%. I suggest the following steps to make sure every one in the community comes along and participates: * Start with an architecture mailing list discussion on high level goals, shortcomings in current schedulers, why writing a new scheduler is justified over extending or contributing to existing ones. An example thread on a related topic - http://airavata.markmail.org/thread/f3ncoxyarateyn4y <http://airavata.markmail.org/thread/f3ncoxyarateyn4y> another on workflows - http://markmail.org/thread/tkpbj3sr4jhg6o6z <http://markmail.org/thread/tkpbj3sr4jhg6o6z>, an example on use of Zookeeper in Airavata - http://airavata.markmail.org/thread/sdidqqf4czprmpik <http://airavata.markmail.org/thread/sdidqqf4czprmpik>. * Once we have a consensus on the architectural approaches, it will be great to do a design discussion on airavata dev list. * Develop the scheduler from scratch on the mailing lists and constantly seek inputs and early users to try. The onus is on the contributor to some how interest from the community. I can understand how laborious all of this sounds, but there are many dormant observers on dev and architecture lists and a good topic awakens them. Airavata strives on such volunteer intellectual contributions which is above and beyond the direct code contributions. > Once you or Gourav-Shenoy have Airavata working with Aurora/Mesos, the idea > is that Pankaj will work with you to use the same codebase/task-module in > Airavata to launch jobs on Mesos using a custom framework. > The thrift client to Aurora is in a working state - https://github.com/apache/airavata/tree/develop/modules/cloud/aurora-client <https://github.com/apache/airavata/tree/develop/modules/cloud/aurora-client> the integration with Airavata is on two ends. Have the statuses pushed into registry (this should be ready by Thursday - I plan to demo it at the gateways workshop). There may be some hard wirings on Aurora end points and so on, which we need to integrate with App Catalog. This might have to wait until we gain better understand on Aurora. Suresh > -Madhu > > > On 10/28/2016 12:46 PM, Mangirish Wagle wrote: >> Hi Pankaj, >> >> I was curious to know what is your motivation to work on developing a custom >> framework and not use Aurora or any existing robust frameworks. It would be >> great if you could share some pointers on that. >> I would also like to know what specific use cases you are targeting through >> your framework, as well as what are various stability concerns that you may >> have identified and how are you planning to handle them? >> >> Regards, >> Mangirish >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Pankaj Saha <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> Mesos collects the resource information from all the nodes in the cluster >> (cores, memory, disk, and gpu) and presents a unified view, as if it is a >> single operating system. The Mesosphere, who a commercial entity for Mesos, >> has built an ecosystem around Mesos as the kernel called the "Data Center >> Operating System (DCOS)". Frameworks interact with Mesos to reserve >> resources and then use these resources to run jobs on the cluster. So, for >> example, if multiple frameworks such as Marathon, Apache Aurora, and a >> custom-MPI-framework are using Mesos, then there is a negotiation between >> Mesos and each framework on how many resources each framework gets. Once the >> framework, say Aurora, gets resources, it can decide how to use those >> resources. Some of the strengths of Mesos include fault tolerance at sca >> l >> e and the ability to co-schedule applications/frameworks on the cluster such >> that cluster utilization is high. >> >> Mesos off-the-shelf only works when the Mater and agent nodes have a line of >> communication to each other. We have worked on modifying the Mesos >> installation so that it even works when agents are behind firewalls on >> campus clusters. We are also working on getting the same setup to work on >> Jetstream and Chameleon where allocations are a mix of public IPs and >> internally accessible nodes. This will allow us to use Mesos to >> meta-schedule across clusters. We are also developing our own framework, to >> be able to customize scheduling and resource negotiations for science >> gateways on Mesos clusters. Our plan is to work with Suresh and Marlon's >> team so that it works with Airavata. >> >> I will be presenting at the Gateways workshop in November, and then I will >> also be at SC along with my adviser (Madhu Govindaraju), if you would like >> to discuss any of these projects. >> >> We are working on packaging our work so that it can be shared with this >> community. >> >> Thanks >> Pankaj >> >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Mangirish Wagle < >> <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> Thanks for your question. So if I understand you correctly, you need kind of >> load balancing between identical clusters through a single Mesos master? >> >> With the current setup, from what I understand, we have a separate mesos >> masters for every cluster on separate clouds. However, its a good >> investigative topic if we can have single mesos master targeting multiple >> identical clusters. We have some work ongoing to use a virtual cluster setup >> with compute resources across clouds to install mesos, but not sure if that >> is what you are looking for. >> >> Regards, >> Mangirish >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Miller, Mark <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> >> I posed a question to Suresh (see below), and he asked me to put this >> question on the dev list. >> >> So here it is. I will be grateful for any comments about the issues you all >> are facing, and what has come up in trying this, as >> >> It seems likely that this is a much simpler problem in concept than it is in >> practice, but its solution has many benefits. >> >> >> Here is my question: >> >> A group of us have been discussing how we might simplify submitting jobs to >> different compute resources in our current implementation of CIPRES, and how >> cloud computing might facilitate this. But none of us are cloud experts. As >> I understand it, the mesos cluster that I have been seeing in the Airavata >> email threads is intended to make it possible to deploy jobs to multiple >> virtual clusters. I am (we are) wondering if Mesos manages submissions to >> identical virtual clusters on multiple machines, and if that works >> efficiently. >> >> >> In our implementation, we have to change the rules to run efficiently on >> different machines, according to gpu availability, and cores per node. I am >> wondering how Mesos/ virtual clusters affect those considerations. >> >> Can mesos create basically identical virtual clusters independent of machine? >> >> >> Thanks for any advice. >> >> >> Mark >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
