[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-6353?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14529383#comment-14529383
 ] 

Arun Suresh commented on MAPREDUCE-6353:
----------------------------------------

The patch itself looks good. Thanks [~adhoot]
But I was wondering if we should allow tasks with 0 vcores (Maybe within the 
context of reservation definition, where in 1 or more resource requests can 
have 0 vcores). Will it make sense to validate this at job submission time the 
value of {{mapreduce.map.cpu.vcores}} / {{mapreduce.reduce.cpu.vcores}} as well 
?

> Divide by zero error in MR AM when calculating available containers
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MAPREDUCE-6353
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-6353
>             Project: Hadoop Map/Reduce
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: mr-am
>            Reporter: Anubhav Dhoot
>            Assignee: Anubhav Dhoot
>         Attachments: MAPREDUCE-6353.001.patch
>
>
> When running a sleep job with zero CPU vcores i see the following exception
> 2015-04-30 06:41:06,954 ERROR [RMCommunicator Allocator] 
> org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.v2.app.rm.RMContainerAllocator: ERROR IN 
> CONTACTING RM. 
> java.lang.ArithmeticException: / by zero
> at 
> org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.v2.app.rm.ResourceCalculatorUtils.computeAvailableContainers(ResourceCalculatorUtils.java:38)
> at 
> org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.v2.app.rm.RMContainerAllocator$ScheduledRequests.assign(RMContainerAllocator.java:947)
> at 
> org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.v2.app.rm.RMContainerAllocator$ScheduledRequests.access$200(RMContainerAllocator.java:840)
> at 
> org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.v2.app.rm.RMContainerAllocator.heartbeat(RMContainerAllocator.java:247)
> at 
> org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.v2.app.rm.RMCommunicator$1.run(RMCommunicator.java:282)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to