[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-9841?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16938834#comment-16938834
]
Manikandan R commented on YARN-9841:
------------------------------------
Thanks [~pbacsko] for review. Addressed all of your comments. Attached
.002.patch.
{quote}If we have this for {{%primary_group}}, can't we just handle
{{%secondary_group}} as well?
{quote}
Initially thought about this, but then preferred to take it in separate for
ease of tracking and to avoid confusions with description etc. Hope you are
fine.
Also, Had a chance to look at observations raised earlier? We can track these
issues in separate JIRA.
{quote}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.
{quote}
Made changes in {{TestCapacitySchedulerQueueMappingFactory}}, but not in
{{TestUserGroupMappingPlacementRule}} as it is commonly by various asserts
wherein some cases ctx is null.
> 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-9841.002.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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
