[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6727?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16062071#comment-16062071
 ] 

Naganarasimha G R commented on YARN-6727:
-----------------------------------------

Thanks [~bibinchundatt] for the WIP patch.
          As i understand, there are 2 issues currently for large queues
# Amount of data which gets transferred 
# number of computations done in the server side as for each queue we are 
trying to match whether user or his group has rights. And also it would suffice 
to know in most case for the leaf queue only.

So IIUC your patch is solving only the first part. But for the second one 
though its not too much of overhead as no locks are held but its unnecessary 
computation. So would it better to optimize it with additional scheduler API 
too, thoughts ?
Further i was thinking it would be good to have list of queues rather than a 
single queue.


> Improve getQueueUserAcls API to query for  specific queue and user
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-6727
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6727
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Bibin A Chundatt
>            Assignee: Bibin A Chundatt
>         Attachments: YARN-6727.WIP.patch
>
>
> Currently {{ApplicationClientProtocol#getQueueUserAcls}} return data for all 
> the queues available in scheduler for user.
> User wants to know whether he has rights of a particular queue only. For 
> systems with 5K queues returning all queues list is not efficient.
> Suggested change: support additional parameters *userName and queueName* as 
> optional. Admin user should be able to query other users ACL for a particular 
> queueName.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to