Konstantinos Karanasos commented on YARN-7920:

Hi [~leftnoteasy],
{quote}I would still prefer to "scheduler", otherwise it will be a duplicated 
config to yarn.resourcemanager.scheduler, and once FS want to support the 
feature, we need to add a new option and document, etc.
Sure, makes sense.

Re: the patch, I will check in more detail the implementation, but a first few 
comments about the naming:
 * The naming external processor is a bit redundant and not very descriptive. 
Let's call it {{PlacementConstraintProcessor}}, since this is what it does.
 * Similarly, in the comments of YarnConfiguration, "external which sits 
outside of the scheduler" is not very helpful about why this should be used. 
Let's say "Handle placement constraints by processor that is agnostic of the 
scheduler implementation".
 * Also, shall we call the {{NoneProcessor}} -> {{DefaultProcessor}} or 
something along these lines?
 * At some places you use the term "placement requests". Maybe say scheduling 

Also, I agree with [~sunilg] to update the doc in the same Jira, it should be 
very few changes.

I would also like to hear from [~asuresh], since he added the processor.

> Cleanup configuration of PlacementConstraints
> ---------------------------------------------
>                 Key: YARN-7920
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7920
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Wangda Tan
>            Assignee: Wangda Tan
>            Priority: Blocker
>         Attachments: YARN-7920.001.patch, YARN-7920.002.patch
> Currently it is very confusing to have the two configs in two different files 
> (yarn-site.xml and capacity-scheduler.xml). 
> Maybe a better approach is: we can delete the scheduling-request.allowed in 
> CS, and update placement-constraints configs in yarn-site.xml a bit: 
> - Remove placement-constraints.enabled, and add a new 
> placement-constraints.handler, by default is none, and other acceptable 
> values are a. external-processor (since algorithm is too generic to me), b. 
> scheduler. 
> - And add a new PlacementProcessor just to pass SchedulingRequest to 
> scheduler without any modifications.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

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