Hi Renjie, there is already an issue for introducing further scheduling constraints (e.g. tags) to achieve TM isolation when using the session mode [1]. What it does not cover is the isolation of the JMs which need to be executed in their own processes. At the moment they share the same process with the Dispatcher because it was simpler to do it like that as first iteration. Here is the issue for isolating JobManagers [2].
Concerning the resource specification, the corresponding issue can be found here [3]. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-8886 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9537 [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5131 Cheers, Till On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:13 AM Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, Stephan: > > Yes that's what I mean. In fact the most import thing is to share the > dispatcher so that we can have *a centralized gateway for flink job > management and submission. The problem with per job cluster is that we > can't have a centralized gateway.* > > I didn't realize that job manager also needs to run user code before and > yes that means we job manager should also be isolated. > > Wouldn't it be better to separate job manager from the dispatcher so that > user code does't interfere with each other? In fact it seems that in most > production environments job isolation is required since nobody want their > job to be affected by others. > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:34 PM Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi Renjie, > > > > When you suggest to have TaskManager isolation in session mode, do you > mean > > to have a shared JobManager / Dispatcher, but job-specific TaskManagers? > > If this mainly to reduce the overhead of the per-job JobManager? > > > > One assumption so far was that if TaskManager isolation is required, > > JobManager isolation is also required, because some user code potentially > > also runs on the JobManager, like CheckpointHooks, Input/Output Formats, > > ... > > > > Best, > > Stephan > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, Till: > > > > > > > > > 1. Does the community has any plan to add task manager isolation > into > > > the session mode? > > > 2. Is there any issues to track this feature? I want to help > > contribute. > > > 3. Thanks for the knowledge but it can't help if task manager > > isolation > > > is not present. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:28 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Renjie, > > > > > > > > 1) you're right that the Flink session mode does not give you proper > > job > > > > isolation. It is the same as with Flink 1.4 session mode. If this is > a > > > > strong requirement for you, then I recommend using the per job mode. > > > > > > > > 2) At the moment it is also not possible to define per job resource > > > > requirements when using the session mode. This is a feature which the > > > > community has started implementing but it is not yet fully done. I > > assume > > > > that the community will continue working on it. At the moment, the > > > solution > > > > would be to use the per job mode to not waste unnecessary resources. > > > > > > > > 3) I think the assigned ResourceID for a TaskManager is shown in the > > web > > > UI > > > > and when querying the "/taskmanagers" REST endpoint. The resource id > is > > > > derived from the Mesos task id. Would that help to identify which TM > is > > > > running on which Mesos task? > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Till > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 5:13 AM Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > > > > > From: Renjie Liu <liurenjie2...@gmail.com> > > > > > Date: Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 10:43 AM > > > > > Subject: [DISCUSS] FLIP-6 Problems > > > > > To: user <u...@flink.apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi: > > > > > > > > > > We've deployed flink 1.5.0 and tested the new cluster manager, it's > > > > really > > > > > great for flink to be elastic. However we've also found some > problems > > > > that > > > > > blocks us from deploying it to production environment. > > > > > > > > > > 1. Task manager isolation. Currently flink allows different jobs to > > > > execute > > > > > on same task managers, this is unacceptable in production > environment > > > > since > > > > > a faulty written job may kill task managers and affect other jobs. > > > > > 2. Per job resource configuration. Currently flink session cluster > > can > > > > only > > > > > allocate same size and configuration task managers. This may waste > a > > > lot > > > > of > > > > > resources if we have a lot of jobs with different resource > > requirement. > > > > > 3. Task manager's name is meanless. This is a problem since we > can't > > > > > monitor status of container in mesos environment. > > > > > > > > > > One solution to the above problems is to use per job cluster, but a > > > > > centralized cluster manager can help to manage flink deployment and > > > jobs > > > > > better. > > > > > > > > > > How you guys think about those? If the community agrees with us, we > > > would > > > > > like to propose design and implementation to enhance the flink > > cluster > > > > > manager. > > > > > -- > > > > > Liu, Renjie > > > > > Software Engineer, MVAD > > > > > -- > > > > > Liu, Renjie > > > > > Software Engineer, MVAD > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Liu, Renjie > > > Software Engineer, MVAD > > > > > > -- > Liu, Renjie > Software Engineer, MVAD >
