[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-1118?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13611241#comment-13611241
]
Virag Kothari commented on OOZIE-1118:
--------------------------------------
I was thinking of the case where the coordinators are configured to be purged
in 3 months while the workflows are configured to be purged in lets say 6
months. Then once the coordinator becomes eligible to purge, the purge service
will bring all the workflows of that coordinator in memory every purge interval
till 3 months and fail to purge. However, as it a system configuration probably
its fine and all this validation may be added later.
The patch looks fine to me.
One question on the patch:
For checking eligibility of purge, all the children are brought into memory.
Instead of that, is it better to filter at the db side?
E.g Having an sql like
{code}
select count(*) from child c where c.parent = parent and c is not eligible to
purge.
if (count > 0) {
isEligibleToPurge = false
}
else {
Purge the parent and children
}
{code}
Also, all the queries should bring only selected columns instead of select *.
Oozie had run into OOM issues due to select * before.
> improve logic of purge service
> ------------------------------
>
> Key: OOZIE-1118
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-1118
> Project: Oozie
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: bundle, coordinator, workflow
> Affects Versions: 3.3.0
> Reporter: Alejandro Abdelnur
> Assignee: Robert Kanter
> Fix For: trunk
>
> Attachments: OOZIE-1118.patch, OOZIE-1118.patch, OOZIE-1118.patch,
> OOZIE-1118.patch, OOZIE-1118.patch, OOZIE-1118.patch, OOZIE-1118.patch
>
>
> The current logic of the purge service is flat. I.e., WF purging only takes
> into account WF end time, it does not take into account that the WF was
> started by a COORD job. This means that completed WFs of a running COORD job
> could be purge if the COORD job runs for longer that the purge age.
> One way of addressing this would be:
> * WF purging only purges WF jobs started directly by a client call.
> * COORD purging purges COORD jobs started directly by a client call. It also
> purges the WF jobs created by the COORD jobs being purged.
> * BUNDLE purging purges BUNDLE jobs, and the corresponding COORD jobs and WF
> jobs.
> This could be handled by a new property in the job beans 'job-owner'. Set to
> 'self' it would mean it can be purged by the same job type purger. If set to
> other value, then it is a higher level purger the one responsible for purging
> it.
> This means that for a WF job started by COORD job started by a BUNDLE job,
> the WF job and the COORD job would have the BUNDLE job as owner, while the
> BUNDLE with have 'self' as owner.
> This ownership propagation would also have
> A caveat here would be how to handle sub-workflows.
> I guess we should check if the wf was created from coord, and if then let
> the coord purge take care of that, meaning wf purge does not purge wf started
> by coords.
> Similarly, the same should also apply for sub-WFs.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
