[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7872?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Yuqi Wang updated YARN-7872:
----------------------------
Description:
*Issue summary:*
labeled node (i.e. node with 'not empty' node label) cannot be used to satisfy
locality specified request (i.e. container request with 'not ANY' resource name
and the relax locality is false).
*For example:*
The node with available resource:
[Resource: [MemoryMB: [100] CpuNumber: [12]] {color:#14892c}NodeLabel:
[persistent]{color} {color:#f79232}HostName: \{SRG}{color} RackName:
\{/default-rack}]
The container request:
[Priority: [1] Resource: [MemoryMB: [1] CpuNumber: [1]]
{color:#14892c}NodeLabel: [null]{color} {color:#f79232}HostNames: \{SRG}{color}
RackNames: {} {color:#59afe1}RelaxLocality: [false]{color}]
Current RM capacity scheduler's behavior is that (at least for version 2.7 and
2.8), the node cannot allocate container for the request, because the node
label is not matched when the leaf queue assign container.
*Possible solution:*
However, node locality and node label should be two orthogonal dimensions to
select candidate nodes for container request. And the node label matching
should only be executed for container request with ANY resource name, since
only this kind of container request is allowed to have 'not empty' node label.
So, for container request with 'not ANY' resource name (so, we know it should
not have node label), we should use the requested resource name to match with
the node instead of using the requested node label to match with the node. And
this resource name matching should be safe, since the node whose node label is
not accessible for the queue will not be sent to the leaf queue.
*Discussion:*
Attachment is the fix according to this principle, please help to review.
Without it, we cannot use locality to request container within these labeled
nodes.
If the fix is acceptable, we should also recheck whether the same issue happens
in trunk and other hadoop versions.
If not acceptable (i.e. the current behavior is by designed), so, how can we
use locality to request container within these labeled nodes?
was:
*Issue summary:*
labeled node (i.e. node with 'not empty' node label) cannot be used to satisfy
locality specified request (i.e. container request with 'not ANY' resource name
and the relax locality is false).
*For example:*
The node with available resource:
[Resource: [MemoryMB: [100] CpuNumber: [12]] {color:#14892c}NodeLabel:
[persistent]{color} {color:#f79232}HostName: \{SRG}{color} RackName:
\{/default-rack}]
The container request:
[Priority: [1] Resource: [MemoryMB: [1] CpuNumber: [1]]
{color:#14892c}NodeLabel: [null]{color} {color:#f79232}HostNames: \{SRG}{color}
RackNames: {} {color:#59afe1}RelaxLocality: [false]{color}]
Current RM capacity scheduler's behavior is that (at least for version 2.7 and
2.8), the node cannot allocate container for the request, because the node
label is not matched when the leaf queue assign container.
*Possible solution:*
However, node locality and node label should be two orthogonal dimensions to
select candidate nodes for container request. And the node label matching
should only be executed for container request with ANY resource name, since
only this kind of container request is allowed to have 'not empty' node label.
So, for container request with 'not ANY' resource name (so, we know it should
not have node label), we should use resource name to match with the node
instead of using node label to match with the node. And this resource name
matching should be safe, since the node whose node label is not accessible for
the queue will not be sent to the leaf queue.
*Discussion:*
Attachment is the fix according to this principle, please help to review.
Without it, we cannot use locality to request container within these labeled
nodes.
If the fix is acceptable, we should also recheck whether the same issue happens
in trunk and other hadoop versions.
If not acceptable (i.e. the current behavior is by designed), so, how can we
use locality to request container within these labeled nodes?
> labeled node cannot be used to satisfy locality specified request
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-7872
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7872
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: capacity scheduler, capacityscheduler, resourcemanager
> Affects Versions: 2.7.2
> Reporter: Yuqi Wang
> Assignee: Yuqi Wang
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 2.7.2
>
> Attachments: YARN-7872-branch-2.7.2.001.patch
>
>
> *Issue summary:*
> labeled node (i.e. node with 'not empty' node label) cannot be used to
> satisfy locality specified request (i.e. container request with 'not ANY'
> resource name and the relax locality is false).
>
> *For example:*
> The node with available resource:
> [Resource: [MemoryMB: [100] CpuNumber: [12]] {color:#14892c}NodeLabel:
> [persistent]{color} {color:#f79232}HostName: \{SRG}{color} RackName:
> \{/default-rack}]
> The container request:
> [Priority: [1] Resource: [MemoryMB: [1] CpuNumber: [1]]
> {color:#14892c}NodeLabel: [null]{color} {color:#f79232}HostNames:
> \{SRG}{color} RackNames: {} {color:#59afe1}RelaxLocality: [false]{color}]
> Current RM capacity scheduler's behavior is that (at least for version 2.7
> and 2.8), the node cannot allocate container for the request, because the
> node label is not matched when the leaf queue assign container.
>
> *Possible solution:*
> However, node locality and node label should be two orthogonal dimensions to
> select candidate nodes for container request. And the node label matching
> should only be executed for container request with ANY resource name, since
> only this kind of container request is allowed to have 'not empty' node label.
> So, for container request with 'not ANY' resource name (so, we know it should
> not have node label), we should use the requested resource name to match with
> the node instead of using the requested node label to match with the node.
> And this resource name matching should be safe, since the node whose node
> label is not accessible for the queue will not be sent to the leaf queue.
>
> *Discussion:*
> Attachment is the fix according to this principle, please help to review.
> Without it, we cannot use locality to request container within these labeled
> nodes.
> If the fix is acceptable, we should also recheck whether the same issue
> happens in trunk and other hadoop versions.
> If not acceptable (i.e. the current behavior is by designed), so, how can we
> use locality to request container within these labeled nodes?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
