[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7391?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Steven Rand updated YARN-7391:
------------------------------
    Attachment: YARN-7391-001.patch

I know this is still under discussion, but attached a patch just to make the 
intent/scope of the proposed change totally clear.

> Consider square root instead of natural log for size-based weight
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-7391
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7391
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: fairscheduler
>    Affects Versions: 3.0.0-beta1
>            Reporter: Steven Rand
>         Attachments: YARN-7391-001.patch
>
>
> Currently for size-based weight, we compute the weight of an app using this 
> code from 
> https://github.com/apache/hadoop/blob/trunk/hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/yarn/server/resourcemanager/scheduler/fair/FairScheduler.java#L377:
> {code}
>       if (sizeBasedWeight) {
>         // Set weight based on current memory demand
>         weight = Math.log1p(app.getDemand().getMemorySize()) / Math.log(2);
>       }
> {code}
> Because the natural log function grows slowly, the weights of two apps with 
> hugely different memory demands can be quite similar. For example, {{weight}} 
> evaluates to 14.3 for an app with a demand of 20 GB, and evaluates to 19.9 
> for an app with a demand of 1000 GB. The app with the much larger demand will 
> still have a higher weight, but not by a large amount relative to the sum of 
> those weights.
> I think it's worth considering a switch to a square root function, which will 
> grow more quickly. In the above example, the app with a demand of 20 GB now 
> has a weight of 143, while the app with a demand of 1000 GB now has a weight 
> of 1012. These weights seem more reasonable relative to each other given the 
> difference in demand between the two apps.
> The above example is admittedly a bit extreme, but I believe that a square 
> root function would also produce reasonable results in general.
> The code I have in mind would look something like:
> {code}
>       if (sizeBasedWeight) {
>         // Set weight based on current memory demand
>         weight = Math.sqrt(app.getDemand().getMemorySize());
>       }
> {code}
> Would people be comfortable with this change?



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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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