[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-898?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15058807#comment-15058807
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on STORM-898:
--------------------------------------
Github user knusbaum commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/921#discussion_r47698225
--- Diff:
storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/scheduler/resource/RAS_Node.java ---
@@ -193,17 +199,21 @@ public void freeAllSlots(Cluster cluster) {
/**
* Frees a single slot in this node
* @param ws the slot to free
- * @param cluster the cluster to update
*/
- public void free(WorkerSlot ws, Cluster cluster) {
+ public void free(WorkerSlot ws) {
+ LOG.info("freeing ws {} on node {}", ws, _hostname);
if (_freeSlots.contains(ws)) return;
for (Entry<String, Set<WorkerSlot>> entry :
_topIdToUsedSlots.entrySet()) {
Set<WorkerSlot> slots = entry.getValue();
+ double memUsed = this.getMemoryUsedByWorker(ws);
--- End diff --
+1 for this along with all the other method calls in this file. Your
argument for using `this` for member variables I can understand (even if I
disagree), but using `this` for method calls doesn't convey anything and is
just clutter.
> Add priorities and per user resource guarantees to Resource Aware Scheduler
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: STORM-898
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-898
> Project: Apache Storm
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: storm-core
> Reporter: Robert Joseph Evans
> Assignee: Boyang Jerry Peng
> Attachments: Resource Aware Scheduler for Storm.pdf
>
>
> In a multi-tenant environment we would like to be able to give individual
> users a guarantee of how much CPU/Memory/Network they will be able to use in
> a cluster. We would also like to know which topologies a user feels are the
> most important to keep running if there are not enough resources to run all
> of their topologies.
> Each user should be able to specify if their topology is production, staging,
> or development. Within each of those categories a user should be able to give
> a topology a priority, 0 to 10 with 10 being the highest priority (or
> something like this).
> If there are not enough resources on a cluster to run a topology assume this
> topology is running using resources and find the user that is most over their
> guaranteed resources. Shoot the lowest priority topology for that user, and
> repeat until, this topology is able to run, or this topology would be the one
> shot. Ideally we don't actually shoot anything until we know that we would
> have made enough room.
> If the cluster is over-subscribed and everyone is under their guarantee, and
> this topology would not put the user over their guarantee. Shoot the lowest
> priority topology in this workers resource pool until there is enough room to
> run the topology or this topology is the one that would be shot. We might
> also want to think about what to do if we are going to shoot a production
> topology in an oversubscribed case, and perhaps we can shoot a non-production
> topology instead even if the other user is not over their guarantee.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
