[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2652?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14544685#comment-14544685
]
Ian Downes commented on MESOS-2652:
-----------------------------------
Actually, a much better way to do this would be to use separate scheduling
policies with CFS. Specifically, run normal tasks with SCHED_OTHER (default)
and run tasks with revokable CPU under SCHED_IDLE.
This creates separate run queues and tasks (in the Linux sense) on SCHED_IDLE
will only run if there's nothing on the SCHED_OTHER queue, i.e., at the
resolution of the scheduler we will always run tasks from non-revokable
containers over tasks in revokable containers.
Further, if non-revokable containers are running batch style jobs we could
*not* use CFS bandwidth quotas for revokable containers and use only cpu shares
to set relative weights. These containers would then balance idle cycles
appropriately, consuming whatever is left after the needs of the non-revokable
containers.
> Update Mesos containerizer to understand revocable cpu resources
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-2652
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2652
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Vinod Kone
> Assignee: Ian Downes
> Labels: twitter
>
> The CPU isolator needs to properly set limits for revocable and non-revocable
> containers.
> The proposed strategy is to use a two-way split of the cpu cgroup hierarchy
> -- normal (non-revocable) and low priority (revocable) subtrees -- and to use
> a biased split of CFS cpu.shares across the subtrees, e.g., a 20:1 split
> (TBD). Containers would be present in only one of the subtrees. CFS quotas
> will *not* be set on subtree roots, only cpu.shares. Each container would set
> CFS quota and shares as done currently.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
