[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-898?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15060686#comment-15060686
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on STORM-898:
--------------------------------------
Github user jerrypeng commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/921#discussion_r47825137
--- Diff: storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/scheduler/TopologyDetails.java
---
@@ -396,34 +410,50 @@ public void addResourcesForExec(ExecutorDetails exec,
Map<String, Double> resour
LOG.warn("Executor {} already exists...ResourceList: {}",
exec, getTaskResourceReqList(exec));
return;
}
- _resourceList.put(exec, resourceList);
+ this.resourceList.put(exec, resourceList);
}
/**
* Add default resource requirements for a executor
*/
public void addDefaultResforExec(ExecutorDetails exec) {
+ Double topologyComponentCpuPcorePercent =
Utils.getDouble(this.topologyConf.get(Config.TOPOLOGY_COMPONENT_CPU_PCORE_PERCENT),
null);
+ if (topologyComponentCpuPcorePercent == null) {
+ LOG.warn("default value for " +
Config.TOPOLOGY_COMPONENT_CPU_PCORE_PERCENT + " needs to be set!");
+ }
--- End diff --
I am still not 100% convinced these checks are not neccessary. If I was a
developer testing RAS and I didn't configure something right by accident thus
causing an NPE in weird spot, I might be discouraged to test out RAS, but if I
see an early exception thrown or warning message telling me that its my fault
for incorrectly configuring RAS, I might not. People tend to blame others for
things going wrong and I don't want anyone to blame the RAS implementation for
having bugs when its the user's fault for using wrong configurations.
> 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)
