Honestly your opinion is welcome, this kind of discussions are great
in this small traffic dev list ;-)
--
Javi Roman

Twitter: @javiromanrh
GitHub: github.com/javiroman
Linkedin: es.linkedin.com/in/javiroman
Big Data Blog: dataintensive.info
Apache Id: javiroman

On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 8:55 PM yuliya Feldman
<yufeld...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>  I am not saying it's crazy. I was voicing my opinion. Isn't it what was the 
> purpose of the discussion?
> It's definitely great to have UI that manages all the YARN clusters, but it's 
> not like UI/Web service has to be coupled/collocated with any of the Myriad 
> particular YARN version daemons.
> It's great if you would provide write up with pros and cons for your approach 
> or any alternative approaches.
>
>
>     On Tuesday, September 24, 2019, 11:38:13 AM PDT, Javi Roman 
> <jroman.espi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:58 PM yuliya Feldman
> <yufeld...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >  Hello,
> > 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.
> > Thanks,Yuliya
>
> Great, I wil do a diagram!
>
> Only for clarify:
>
> Myriad is registered as framework in Mesos master. The same thread
> start the API server and the user interface. By means the user
> interface you select the YARN version to run, and the scheduler get
> resources from master for running RM and NMs. So you con manage as
> many YARN schedulers you want. YARN as a Service.
>
> Maybe I am missing the point, bu I don't feel this is something so
> strange, or so crazy!
>
>
> >    On Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 11:55:07 PM PDT, Oscar Fernandez 
> > <oscarf...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >  Hi,
> >
> > 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
> > versions.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
>

Reply via email to