Actually it is not documented anywhere, maybe we can do that. Was having
tough time thinking how to implement this in Spark-743.


On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Yadid Ayzenberg <[email protected]>wrote:

>  My bad - I should have stated that up front. I guess it was kind of
> implicit within my question.
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Yadid
>
>
>
> On 11/19/13 10:59 AM, Mark Hamstra wrote:
>
> Ah, sorry -- misunderstood the question.
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2013, at 7:48 AM, Prashant Sharma <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>   I think that is Scheduling Within an Application, and he asked across
> apps. Actually spark standalone supports two ways of scheduling both are
> FIFO type.
> http://spark.incubator.apache.org/docs/latest/spark-standalone.html
>
>  One is spread out mode and the other is use as fewer node as possible
> [1]
>
>  1.
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/blob/master/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/deploy/master/Master.scala#L383
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Mark Hamstra <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> According to the documentation, spark standalone currently only
> supports a FIFO scheduling system.
> >
> >
> > That's not true.
> >
> > [sorry for the prior misfire]
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Mark Hamstra <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 6:50 AM, Yadid Ayzenberg <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> According to the documentation, spark standalone currently only
> supports a FIFO scheduling system.
> >>> I understand its possible to limit the number of cores a job uses by
> setting spark.cores.max.
> >>> When running a job, will spark try using the max number of cores on
> each machine until it reaches the set limit, or will it do this round robin
> style - utilize a single core on each machine -  if its already used a core
> on all of the slaves and the limit has not been reached, spark will utilize
> an additional core on each machine and so on.
> >>>
> >>> I think the latter make more sense, but I want to be sure that is the
> case.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Yadid
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> s
>
>
>


-- 
s

Reply via email to