[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-614?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Robert Kanter resolved OOZIE-614.
---------------------------------

    Resolution: Duplicate

> Oozie does not behave as expected when using coordinator execution order 
> LAST_ONLY
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OOZIE-614
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-614
>             Project: Oozie
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Craig Peters
>            Assignee: Ryota Egashira
>
> After executing the last coordinator action on a queue for a job, the prior 
> coordinator actions will still be executed if a later coordinator action is 
> not created.  The behavior expected based upon the documentation for 
> Coordinator is that the older coordinator actions are discarded.  See: 
> http://yahoo.github.com/oozie/releases/3.1.0/CoordinatorFunctionalSpec.html#a6.3._Synchronous_Coordinator_Application_Definition
> When using the LAST_ONLY execution order the coordinator job needs to somehow 
> discard the older coordinator actions as the documentation describes.  This 
> may result the desired behavior for many users when in steady state operation.
> Using a simple approach of invalidating or killing prior coordinator actions 
> there are likely to be cases when this functionality won't behave as expected 
> because at any given time the latest coordinator on the queue in the READY 
> state will not be the latest potential.  This is because the newer actions 
> haven't been created yet due to the batch creation of coordinator actions 
> oldest first.  Some discussion of the best way to address this challenge is 
> warranted I believe.
> Another consideration is that the user will not be able to easily 
> discriminate between coordinator actions that were discarded (or skipped) due 
> to the execution order and those that were killed for any other reason.  
> Perhaps it makes sense to introduce a new state?  It could be DISCARDED to 
> match the current documentation or perhaps SKIPPED.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to