[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7763?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16333090#comment-16333090
]
Weiwei Yang commented on YARN-7763:
-----------------------------------
Hi [~sunilg]
{quote} i think *constraint* could be updated in *pcm* than in a util. So when
a policy comes to support different level, we could operate from *pcm* better.
{quote}
Agreed, [~kkaranasos] was giving a similar comment too, please see YARN-7778.
We can track a further improvements with the handling of different level of
constraints in that JIRA.
> Allow Constraints specified in the SchedulingRequest to override application
> level constraints
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-7763
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7763
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Wangda Tan
> Assignee: Weiwei Yang
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: YARN-7763-YARN-6592.001.patch,
> YARN-7763-YARN-6592.002.patch, YARN-7763-YARN-6592.003.patch,
> YARN-7763-YARN-6592.004.patch, YARN-7763-YARN-6592.005.patch,
> YARN-7763-YARN-6592.006.patch
>
>
> As I mentioned on YARN-6599, we will add SchedulingRequest as part of the
> PlacementConstraintUtil method and both of processor/scheduler implementation
> will use the same logic. The logic looks like:
> {code:java}
> PlacementConstraint pc = schedulingRequest.getPlacementConstraint();
> If (pc == null) {
> pc =
> PlacementConstraintMgr.getPlacementConstraint(schedulingRequest.getAllocationTags());
> }
> // Do placement constraint match ...{code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
