John, The remote distribution doesn't require the nm to be run from marathon though it's possible. Essentially, it's the same configuration for the rm you'd do for the non remote version + adding a uri for the tarball. I've got jsons for running the rm in marathon, I'll try to get them and some documentation up soon. Currently at a conference though which means probably next week.
Darin Darin On Aug 18, 2015 2:49 PM, "John Omernik" <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, so I tried the remote distribution of the Myriad per the docs, I > guess,it could probably use some information related to "how" to run > resource manager if it's in the tar.gz. Perhaps an example marathon json. > I am playing with it now to figure it out. > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:48 PM, yuliya Feldman > <[email protected] > > wrote: > > > mesos/myriad is the right one so far > > From: John Omernik <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected]; yuliya Feldman < > [email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 1:44 PM > > Subject: Re: Myriad 0.1 release scope > > > > (So if I clone that repo, am I cloning the right one?) > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:43 PM, John Omernik <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Ok, I was going off > > > > https://github.com/mesos/myriad/blob/phase1/docs/myriad-configuration.md > > > > > > I will try it. > > > > > > John > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:40 PM, yuliya Feldman < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> You actually do not need to rebuild even today - just keep this file > in > > >> hadoop config directory that is on the classpath: like .../etc/hadoop > > >> From: John Omernik <[email protected]> > > >> To: [email protected] > > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 1:35 PM > > >> Subject: Re: Myriad 0.1 release scope > > >> > > >> On the release scope, will having the myriad configuration file exist > > >> outside the jar (i.e. you can change configuration without rebuilding) > > be > > >> part of the .1 release scope? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 10:01 PM, Santosh Marella < > > [email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > Hello All, > > >> > > > >> > I've merged the FGS changes into phase1. Built and tested both > coarse > > >> > grained scaling and fine grained scaling, UI on a 4 node cluster. > > >> > > > >> > If anyone finds things are not working as expected, please let me > > know. > > >> > > > >> > Thanks, > > >> > Santosh > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Santosh Marella < > > [email protected] > > >> > > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Hello guys, > > >> > > > > >> > > I propose merging FGS into phase1. As I said before, I think it's > > at a > > >> > > point where the functionality works reasonably well. > > >> > > Any future improvements/fixes/UI changes can be done via separate > > >> JIRAs. > > >> > > > > >> > > Unless there are any major concerns, I'd like to merge FGS into > > phase1 > > >> > > *EOD Monday* (PDT). > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > >> > > Santosh > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Santosh Marella < > > >> [email protected]> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > >> I feel FGS is very close to making it into 0.1. PR 116 addresses > > >> moving > > >> > >> to hadoop 2.7 and making FGS and CGS coexist. This PR was > recently > > >> > reviewed > > >> > >> by Yulia and Darin. Darin had also tried out FGS on hadoop 2.6.x > > and > > >> > 2.7.x > > >> > >> clusters and it seemed to have worked as expected. Unless there > are > > >> more > > >> > >> reviews/feedback, it can be merged into issue_14. Once PR 116 is > > >> merged > > >> > >> into issue_14, issue_14 can be merged into phase1. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Thanks, > > >> > >> Santosh > > >> > >> > > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Adam Bordelon < > [email protected]> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > >> > > >> > >>> We do have a JIRA 0.1.0 "fix version" field, but none of our > > issues > > >> use > > >> > >>> it > > >> > >>> yet. > > >> > >>> I think the goal was just to take what we have and make it work > > >> under > > >> > >>> Apache infrastructure, then vote on that for 0.1.0. > > >> > >>> Although other features like HA or FGS would be great, let's try > > to > > >> get > > >> > >>> our > > >> > >>> first Apache release out ASAP. > > >> > >>> We can create 0.1.1 or 0.2.0 fix versions for subsequent > releases > > >> with > > >> > >>> other issues/features. Roadmap would be great. > > >> > >>> (I'm just summarizing what we discussed a month or two ago. Feel > > >> free > > >> > to > > >> > >>> correct me or disagree with this approach.) > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Swapnil Daingade < > > >> > >>> [email protected] > > >> > >>> > wrote: > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > Hi all, > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > Was wondering what would be the scope for the Myriad 0.1 > > release. > > >> > >>> > It would be nice to have a roadmap page somewhere and target > > >> > >>> > features to releases (JIRA 'fix version' field perhaps) > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > Regards > > >> > >>> > Swapnil > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
