[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-9841?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16938291#comment-16938291 ]
Peter Bacsko commented on YARN-9841: ------------------------------------ Just some really minor comments: {noformat} 70 if (expectedParentQueue != null) { 71 Assert.assertEquals(expectedParentQueue, 72 ctx != null ? ctx.getParentQueue() : inputQueue); 73 } {noformat} Could you add an assertion message here? {noformat} 187 Assert.assertEquals("a", ctx != null ? ctx.getQueue() : "default"); 188 Assert.assertEquals("agroup", 189 ctx != null ? ctx.getParentQueue() : "default"); 190 } {noformat} Three things here: 1. Assertion message "a" is very short, I think it should be like "Expected queue". 2. Similaly, "Expected group" instead of "agroup" 3. Can {{ctx}} ever be null? I assume this test should produce the same behavior each time, provided the code-under-test doesn't change. So to me it seems more logical to make sure that {{ctx}} is not null, which practically means a new assertion. Btw this applies to the piece of code above, too. > Capacity scheduler: add support for combined %user + %primary_group mapping > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: YARN-9841 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-9841 > Project: Hadoop YARN > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: capacity scheduler > Reporter: Peter Bacsko > Assignee: Manikandan R > Priority: Major > Attachments: YARN-9841.001.patch, YARN-9841.001.patch, > YARN-9841.junit.patch > > > Right now in CS, using {{%primary_group}} with a parent queue is only > possible this way: > {{u:%user:parentqueue.%primary_group}} > Looking at > 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/placement/UserGroupMappingPlacementRule.java, > we cannot do something like: > {{u:%user:%primary_group.%user}} > Fair Scheduler supports a nested rule where such a placement/mapping rule is > possible. This improvement would reduce this feature gap. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org