[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1028?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13850476#comment-13850476
]
Bikas Saha commented on YARN-1028:
----------------------------------
logging all RM addresses is not going help much in yarnclient. lets get rid off
it and the ha code.
If we have a common impl of createRMFailoverProxyProvider in RMProxy then we
probably dont need to do INSTANCE.createRMFailoverProxyProvider right?
{code}
+ INSTANCE.createRMFailoverProxyProvider(conf, protocol);
{code}
agree with most of vinods comments except removing the type info. did not seem
bogus when the code was originally added. in any case, if thats true, then we
should leave it to a separate jira.
I am in favor of getting rid of the waitForever / failoverForever. They are
extra headaches in the configuration and in practice we never want to
wait/failover forever. forever can be approximated to multiple hours/days using
appropriate settings for the retry/failover timeouts.
Patch looks good to me for the rest of the stuff.
> 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-1028-6.patch, yarn-1028-7.patch,
> yarn-1028-8.patch, yarn-1028-9.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)
