xintongsong commented on a change in pull request #11353: [FLINK-16438][yarn]
Make YarnResourceManager starts workers using WorkerResourceSpec requested by
SlotManager
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/11353#discussion_r404479778
##########
File path:
flink-kubernetes/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/kubernetes/KubernetesResourceManager.java
##########
@@ -232,57 +229,75 @@ private void recoverWorkerNodesFromPreviousAttempts()
throws ResourceManagerExce
++currentMaxAttemptId);
}
- private void requestKubernetesPod() {
- numPendingPodRequests++;
+ private void requestKubernetesPod(WorkerResourceSpec
workerResourceSpec) {
+ final KubernetesTaskManagerParameters parameters =
+
createKubernetesTaskManagerParameters(workerResourceSpec);
+
+ podWorkerResources.put(parameters.getPodName(),
workerResourceSpec);
+ final int pendingWorkerNum =
pendingWorkerCounter.increaseAndGet(workerResourceSpec);
log.info("Requesting new TaskManager pod with <{},{}>. Number
pending requests {}.",
- defaultMemoryMB,
- defaultCpus,
- numPendingPodRequests);
+ parameters.getTaskManagerMemoryMB(),
+ parameters.getTaskManagerCPU(),
+ pendingWorkerNum);
+ log.info("TaskManager {} will be started with {}.",
parameters.getPodName(), workerResourceSpec);
+
+ final KubernetesPod taskManagerPod =
+
KubernetesTaskManagerFactory.createTaskManagerComponent(parameters);
+ kubeClient.createTaskManagerPod(taskManagerPod);
+ }
+
+ private KubernetesTaskManagerParameters
createKubernetesTaskManagerParameters(WorkerResourceSpec workerResourceSpec) {
+ // TODO: need to unset process/flink memory size from
configuration if dynamic worker resource is activated
Review comment:
I don't think we have that requirement.
The purpose of unsetting flink/process size from configuration, is to make
sure the values in `workerResourceSpec` (task heap, task off-heap, network,
managed) and those not in `workerResorceSpec`(framework heap, framework
off-heap, jvm metaspace, jvm overhead, total flink, total process) can put
together w/o conflict.
If they cannot be put together, we don't really need a check state to remind
us because the generating of `taskExecutorProcessSpec` will fail.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
