[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2363?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Park updated MESOS-2363:
--------------------------------
Comment: was deleted
(was: The resolution for this is to use the existing authorization mechanism
via ACLs to specify the rules for who can unreserve whose resources.)
> Reach a consensus on the terminology for Reservation levels.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-2363
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2363
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Michael Park
>
> With the introduction of dynamic reservations, frameworks are given the
> ability to reserve unreserved resources for their role.
> We introduce different levels of reservations in order to give full admin
> control to the operators and also to prevent the frameworks to override
> operator-configured settings.
> The initial idea was to introduce a {{ReserverType}} with {{OPERATOR}} and
> {{FRAMEWORK}} to distinguish them. It turns out however that this idea
> doesn't work well if we want to allow an authorized framework with
> operator-level permissions to make operator-level changes. This leads to the
> idea that perhaps the names should be tied to the nature of reservation
> level, rather than the reserver.
> The following are a few ideas that have been suggested, would be great to
> compile a biggest list here and reach a consensus on our terminology.
> 1. Strong vs. Weak.
> This indicates the *strength* of the reservation, they're both dynamic but an
> operator or an authorized framework can make strong reservations whereas
> regular frameworks would make weak reservations.
> 2. System vs User.
> Suggested by [~cmaloney], this comes from the Linux world where sysadmins and
> authorized users can change system-level settings but regular users can
> change user-level settings.
> 3. Preset vs Runtime.
> Suggested by [~benjaminhindman], operators set preset-reservations and
> runtime reservations that can be changed by frameworks.
> 4. Reservation Levels.
> Similar to {{SEV}}. Indicate the strength of the reservation with a number.
> Maybe {{RSVN1}}, {{RSVN2}}, etc. If you have access to {{RSVN_N}}, you have
> access to all higher {{RSVN}}.
> I like the generality of (4), since if we were to add more strengths/levels
> of reservations, it would be the easiest to extend. Having said that, I also
> think that having good names would also be valuable.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
