[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1028?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13845471#comment-13845471
]
Tom White commented on YARN-1028:
---------------------------------
It looks like the behaviour in this patch differs from the way failover is
implemented for HDFS HA, where it is controlled by dfs.client.failover settings
(e.g. dfs.client.failover.max.attempts is configured explicitly rather than
being calculated from the IPC settings). Would having the corresponding
settings for RM HA make sense? (E.g. from a configuration consistency and
well-tested code path point of view.)
Why do you need both YarnFailoverProxyProvider and
ConfiguredFailoverProxyProvider? The latter should be sufficient; it might also
be called RMFailoverProxyProvider.
> Add FailoverProxyProvider like capability to RMProxy
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-1028
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1028
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Bikas Saha
> Assignee: Karthik Kambatla
> Attachments: yarn-1028-1.patch, yarn-1028-2.patch, yarn-1028-3.patch,
> yarn-1028-4.patch, yarn-1028-5.patch, yarn-1028-draft-cumulative.patch
>
>
> RMProxy layer currently abstracts RM discovery and implements it by looking
> up service information from configuration. Motivated by HDFS and using
> existing classes from Common, we can add failover proxy providers that may
> provide RM discovery in extensible ways.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.4#6159)
