Again I apologize for the late reply.
I think I replied to the thread, but will add more direct notes here
What you are proposing is to have yet another daemon that would start Yarn 
Clusters on demand within Mesos framework.
Meaning - it would be another layer of abstraction.  In this case that new 
layer would need to behave as second level scheduler and deal with third level 
scheduler(s) (RMs) to propagate offers from Mesos and keep track, etc.
I am sure you can somehow use concept of Capacity and/or FairShare scheduler in 
your new layer to do the job. I am just not very much convinced that 3 layers 
of scheduling will be easy to maintain/reconcile/etc.
Again - if I understand your design correctly.
Would be great if you do a small write up with the proposal and have some 
simple diagram of services interactions.
Just my 2c.
    On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 11:55:07 PM PDT, Oscar Fernandez 
<oscarf...@apache.org> wrote:  

I've started working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYRIAD-295 -
Multiple versions of Apache Hadoop YARN as a Service.

In order to implement this, we should avoid starting the Myriad framework
from Yarn and instead starting Yarn(s) from Myriad on demand.

I wanted to ask the Myriad community if this design was intended for a
reason or if you think it's a good idea to decouple the execution of Myriad
from the Yarn RM. With the new design, the Myriad Framework would register
on Mesos, and then, start on demand the RM and NM that the user wants,
allowing several Yarn clusters to run in he same Mesos, even with different

Thank you

Reply via email to