Ah yeah that makes sense. So even though there is more than 7GiB available aurora adds on an extra 128MB when trying to figure out where the task can run to account for the executor. The extra 128MB was the piece i was missing.
Thanks! On Wed, Dec 9, 2015, at 04:00 PM, Bill Farner wrote: > It's GiB, but there is a slice of per-task resource overhead added for > the executor. I believe the default is 128 MB RAM for that, which > seems to line up with what you are seeing. > > On Wednesday, December 9, 2015, Andrew Jorgensen > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I am currently using aurora version 0.9.0-rc0-2 and mesos 0.23.0 >> >> I have a job that's stuck pending waiting for resources, specifically it >> is waiting for ram. The job config says that the job needs 3 cores, 7.00 >> GiB ram, and 16GiB disk. If I look at the mesos offers page I can see >> that there are a number of machines that have 7.1GB available and if I >> look at the offers in aurora I see a number of nodes that look like: >> >> {..., >> "hostname":"host","resources":[{"name":"cpus","scalar":7.0},{"name":"me- m","scalar":7236.0},{"name":"disk","scalar":253167.0, >> ...} >> >> So it looks to me that there is enough memory to schedule the pending >> tasks but they are not actually getting scheduled. So one question is >> whether the mesos ui and the aurora ui are using the same units >> (gibibytes vs gigabytes). If they are then why would a scalar value of >> 7236 not able to accomodate the pending tasks? >> >> -- >> Andrew Jorgensen >> @ajorgensen
