[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6344?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15957849#comment-15957849
 ] 

Jason Lowe commented on YARN-6344:
----------------------------------

I'd prefer a configured rack locality delay of zero means no additional rack 
delay, but I see that is semantically different than disabling it altogether.  
Specifying a rack locality delay of zero means it will _not_ scale the node 
locality delay based on the request/cluster sizes like it does today, whereas 
setting it to -1 will.  In that sense it's not purely an additional delay.  
Given I don't know the complete backstory on the reasoning behind why it 
behaves the way it does for node locality delay, I can see the desire to leave 
the existing behavior unchanged when this new setting isn't configured.

Patch looks good to me.


> Rethinking OFF_SWITCH locality in CapacityScheduler
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-6344
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6344
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: capacityscheduler
>            Reporter: Konstantinos Karanasos
>            Assignee: Konstantinos Karanasos
>         Attachments: YARN-6344.001.patch, YARN-6344.002.patch, 
> YARN-6344.003.patch, YARN-6344.004.patch
>
>
> When relaxing locality from node to rack, the {{node-locality-parameter}} is 
> used: when scheduling opportunities for a scheduler key are more than the 
> value of this parameter, we relax locality and try to assign the container to 
> a node in the corresponding rack.
> On the other hand, when relaxing locality to off-switch (i.e., assign the 
> container anywhere in the cluster), we are using a {{localityWaitFactor}}, 
> which is computed based on the number of outstanding requests for a specific 
> scheduler key, which is divided by the size of the cluster. 
> In case of applications that request containers in big batches (e.g., 
> traditional MR jobs), and for relatively small clusters, the 
> localityWaitFactor does not affect relaxing locality much.
> However, in case of applications that request containers in small batches, 
> this load factor takes a very small value, which leads to assigning 
> off-switch containers too soon. This situation is even more pronounced in big 
> clusters.
> For example, if an application requests only one container per request, the 
> locality will be relaxed after a single missed scheduling opportunity.
> The purpose of this JIRA is to rethink the way we are relaxing locality for 
> off-switch assignments.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org

Reply via email to