[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-5844?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Maysam Yabandeh updated MAPREDUCE-5844:
---------------------------------------

    Attachment: MAPREDUCE-5844.patch

Attaching the patch that also updates the variables' names: 
reduceResourceRequest and mapResourceRequest

> Reducer Preemption is too aggressive
> ------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MAPREDUCE-5844
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-5844
>             Project: Hadoop Map/Reduce
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Maysam Yabandeh
>            Assignee: Maysam Yabandeh
>         Attachments: MAPREDUCE-5844.patch, MAPREDUCE-5844.patch, 
> MAPREDUCE-5844.patch, MAPREDUCE-5844.patch
>
>
> We observed cases where the reducer preemption makes the job finish much 
> later, and the preemption does not seem to be necessary since after 
> preemption both the preempted reducer and the mapper are assigned 
> immediately--meaning that there was already enough space for the mapper.
> The logic for triggering preemption is at 
> RMContainerAllocator::preemptReducesIfNeeded
> The preemption is triggered if the following is true:
> {code}
> headroom +  am * |m| + pr * |r| < mapResourceRequest
> {code} 
> where am: number of assigned mappers, |m| is mapper size, pr is number of 
> reducers being preempted, and |r| is the reducer size.
> The original idea apparently was that if headroom is not big enough for the 
> new mapper requests, reducers should be preempted. This would work if the job 
> is alone in the cluster. Once we have queues, the headroom calculation 
> becomes more complicated and it would require a separate headroom calculation 
> per queue/job.
> So, as a result headroom variable is kind of given up currently: *headroom is 
> always set to 0* What this implies to the speculation is that speculation 
> becomes very aggressive, not considering whether there is enough space for 
> the mappers or not.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to