spoon-lz opened a new pull request #17092:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/17092
<!--
*Thank you very much for contributing to Apache Flink - we are happy that
you want to help us improve Flink. To help the community review your
contribution in the best possible way, please go through the checklist below,
which will get the contribution into a shape in which it can be best reviewed.*
*Please understand that we do not do this to make contributions to Flink a
hassle. In order to uphold a high standard of quality for code contributions,
while at the same time managing a large number of contributions, we need
contributors to prepare the contributions well, and give reviewers enough
contextual information for the review. Please also understand that
contributions that do not follow this guide will take longer to review and thus
typically be picked up with lower priority by the community.*
## Contribution Checklist
- Make sure that the pull request corresponds to a [JIRA
issue](https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/FLINK/issues). Exceptions are
made for typos in JavaDoc or documentation files, which need no JIRA issue.
- Name the pull request in the form "[FLINK-XXXX] [component] Title of the
pull request", where *FLINK-XXXX* should be replaced by the actual issue
number. Skip *component* if you are unsure about which is the best component.
Typo fixes that have no associated JIRA issue should be named following
this pattern: `[hotfix] [docs] Fix typo in event time introduction` or
`[hotfix] [javadocs] Expand JavaDoc for PuncuatedWatermarkGenerator`.
- Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the
pull request. That will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
- Make sure that the change passes the automated tests, i.e., `mvn clean
verify` passes. You can set up Azure Pipelines CI to do that following [this
guide](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Azure+Pipelines#AzurePipelines-Tutorial:SettingupAzurePipelinesforaforkoftheFlinkrepository).
- Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from
multiple issues.
- Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message
(including the JIRA id)
- Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text and
this checklist, leaving only the filled out template below.
**(The sections below can be removed for hotfixes of typos)**
-->
## What is the purpose of the change
For the current native Kubernetes, we start the job to apply for resources
(CPU,Memory) of the same **limit** and **request**, so as to achieve the best
performance. However, in general, when the kubernetes cluster resources are
used up by request allocation, In fact, there are still some physical resources
left. If there is a way to reduce the number of requests per job, more jobs can
be run and the resource utilization of the cluster can be improved.
Here are some simple configurations to scale down the value of request:
```
kubernetes.cpu.request.percent
kubernetes.mem.request.percent
```
kubernetes.mem.request.percent： the default value is 1.0, the effective
range of 0.0 to 1.0, the meaning of this value is: If the value is 0.5 and the
total memory of taskmanager/jobmanager is 2048MB, the value of request is
2048MB*0.5=1024MB. That is, if the remaining memory of nodes is larger than
1024MB, pods can be allocated to run
kubernetes.cpu.request.percent: the default value is 1.0, the effective
range of 0.0 to 1.0, the meaning of this value is: If the value is 0.5 and the
number of cpus requested by TaskManager/JobManager is 1, the value of request
is 1 x 0.5=0.5, that is, the remaining CPU usage of Nodes is greater than 0.5
to allocate pods to run
## Brief change log
Supports setting the percentage of kubernetes Request resources
## Verifying this change
This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
org.apache.flink.kubernetes.utils.KubernetesUtilsTest#testRequestMemory
org.apache.flink.kubernetes.utils.KubernetesUtilsTest#testRequestCpu
## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
- Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
- The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with
`@Public(Evolving)`: no
- The serializers: no
- The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): no
- Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its
components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn, ZooKeeper: yes
- The S3 file system connector: no
## Documentation
- Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
- If yes, how is the feature documented? not documented
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
