[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-8895?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16667544#comment-16667544 ]
Young Chen commented on YARN-8895: ---------------------------------- Hi [~leftnoteasy] - 1 - I agree that we should make this a new field and leave diagnostics as is until we have equivalent or better functionality with the structured errors. 2 - The most important changes will be: * code in NM and the RM to construct these structured errors as close to the source as possible * Protobuf changes for the NM to communicate these errors to the RM, maybe in container status reports if the exit was abnormal * Update RM failover to save these structured errors during restarts As for details, I'm still debating whether a pluggable structured error implementation would be worth it - I think error structures are more or less very similar. Error code, message, description, source component, user/system, etc.. What do you think? > Improve YARN Error diagnostics > ------------------------------- > > Key: YARN-8895 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-8895 > Project: Hadoop YARN > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Young Chen > Assignee: Young Chen > Priority: Minor > > Currently identifying error sources can be quite difficult, as they are > written into an unstructured string "diagnostics" field. This is present in > container statuses returned to the RM and in application attempts in the RM. > These errors are difficult to classify without hard-coding diagnostic string > searches. > This Jira aims to add a structured error field in NM and RM that preserves > failure information and source component to enable faster and clearer error > diagnosis > -- 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