[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-568?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13648985#comment-13648985
]
Carlo Curino commented on YARN-568:
-----------------------------------
Hi Sandy, thanks for the feedback!
I think that if the choice of container is consistent across invocations, this
should all turn out
ok (and fair to the AM, as we only kill containers we told you about before).
But I need to double-check
the FairScheduler code carefully before giving a precise answer. I will look
into it and get back to you.
> FairScheduler: support for work-preserving preemption
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-568
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-568
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: scheduler
> Reporter: Carlo Curino
> Assignee: Carlo Curino
> Attachments: YARN-568.patch, YARN-568.patch
>
>
> In the attached patch, we modified the FairScheduler to substitute its
> preemption-by-killling with a work-preserving version of preemption (followed
> by killing if the AMs do not respond quickly enough). This should allows to
> run preemption checking more often, but kill less often (proper tuning to be
> investigated). Depends on YARN-567 and YARN-45, is related to YARN-569.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
