[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6050?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15799582#comment-15799582
]
Wangda Tan commented on YARN-6050:
----------------------------------
[~templedf], it is not only for AM, all existing ResourceRequest treats
ResourceRequest with resourceName=* separately. Please file a ticket to track
documentation / javadocs changes
I think we need some additional checks / logics
- First, for AM request list, we need to make sure it has a valid offswitch
request
- Second, as mentioned by Daniel, it's better to check asks resources and
node-label-expression, if non-offswitch request has different
resourceName/node-label-expression, we should set it to same as offswitch
request
- Third, I think we still need to force priority and #asks of AM request, there
could be some existing logics assume AM request has a special priority.
It's better to add a test to make sure check/validation/normalization of
RMAppManager works as expected.
Thoughts?
> AMs can't be scheduled on racks or nodes
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-6050
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6050
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.9.0, 3.0.0-alpha2
> Reporter: Robert Kanter
> Assignee: Robert Kanter
> Attachments: YARN-6050.001.patch, YARN-6050.002.patch
>
>
> Yarn itself supports rack/node aware scheduling for AMs; however, there
> currently are two problems:
> # To specify hard or soft rack/node requests, you have to specify more than
> one {{ResourceRequest}}. For example, if you want to schedule an AM only on
> "rackA", you have to create two {{ResourceRequest}}, like this:
> {code}
> ResourceRequest.newInstance(PRIORITY, ANY, CAPABILITY, NUM_CONTAINERS, false);
> ResourceRequest.newInstance(PRIORITY, "rackA", CAPABILITY, NUM_CONTAINERS,
> true);
> {code}
> The problem is that the Yarn API doesn't actually allow you to specify more
> than one {{ResourceRequest}} in the {{ApplicationSubmissionContext}}. The
> current behavior is to either build one from {{getResource}} or directly from
> {{getAMContainerResourceRequest}}, depending on if
> {{getAMContainerResourceRequest}} is null or not. We'll need to add a third
> method, say {{getAMContainerResourceRequests}}, which takes a list of
> {{ResourceRequest}} so that clients can specify the multiple resource
> requests.
> # There are some places where things are hardcoded to overwrite what the
> client specifies. These are pretty straightforward to fix.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
