[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-611?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14055103#comment-14055103
 ] 

Xuan Gong commented on YARN-611:
--------------------------------

[~revans2] Thanks for the review.

bq. Why are you using java serialization for the retry policy? There are too 
many problems with java serialization, especially if we are persisting it into 
a DB, like the state store. Please switch to using something like protocol 
buffers that will allow for forward/backward compatible modifications going 
forward.

Right, We do not need to. Used a more simplified way to do it in the new patch.

bq. in the javadocs for RMApp.setRetryCount it would be good to explain what 
retry count actually is and does.

DONE

bq. In the constructor for RMAppAttemptImpl there is special logic to call 
setup only for WindowsSlideAMRetryCountResetPolicy. This completely loses the 
abstraction that the AMResetCountPolicy interface should be providing. Please 
update the interface so that you don't need special case code for a single 
implementation.

DONE

bq. In RMAppAttemptImpl you mark setMaybeLastAttemptFlag as Private this really 
should have been done in the parent interface. In the parent interface you also 
add in myBeLastAttempt() this too should be marked as Private and both of them 
should have comments that these are for testing.

Added more comments. DONE



> Add an AM retry count reset window to YARN RM
> ---------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-611
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-611
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: resourcemanager
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.3-alpha
>            Reporter: Chris Riccomini
>            Assignee: Xuan Gong
>         Attachments: YARN-611.1.patch, YARN-611.2.patch
>
>
> YARN currently has the following config:
> yarn.resourcemanager.am.max-retries
> This config defaults to 2, and defines how many times to retry a "failed" AM 
> before failing the whole YARN job. YARN counts an AM as failed if the node 
> that it was running on dies (the NM will timeout, which counts as a failure 
> for the AM), or if the AM dies.
> This configuration is insufficient for long running (or infinitely running) 
> YARN jobs, since the machine (or NM) that the AM is running on will 
> eventually need to be restarted (or the machine/NM will fail). In such an 
> event, the AM has not done anything wrong, but this is counted as a "failure" 
> by the RM. Since the retry count for the AM is never reset, eventually, at 
> some point, the number of machine/NM failures will result in the AM failure 
> count going above the configured value for 
> yarn.resourcemanager.am.max-retries. Once this happens, the RM will mark the 
> job as failed, and shut it down. This behavior is not ideal.
> I propose that we add a second configuration:
> yarn.resourcemanager.am.retry-count-window-ms
> This configuration would define a window of time that would define when an AM 
> is "well behaved", and it's safe to reset its failure count back to zero. 
> Every time an AM fails the RmAppImpl would check the last time that the AM 
> failed. If the last failure was less than retry-count-window-ms ago, and the 
> new failure count is > max-retries, then the job should fail. If the AM has 
> never failed, the retry count is < max-retries, or if the last failure was 
> OUTSIDE the retry-count-window-ms, then the job should be restarted. 
> Additionally, if the last failure was outside the retry-count-window-ms, then 
> the failure count should be set back to 0.
> This would give developers a way to have well-behaved AMs run forever, while 
> still failing mis-behaving AMs after a short period of time.
> I think the work to be done here is to change the RmAppImpl to actually look 
> at app.attempts, and see if there have been more than max-retries failures in 
> the last retry-count-window-ms milliseconds. If there have, then the job 
> should fail, if not, then the job should go forward. Additionally, we might 
> also need to add an endTime in either RMAppAttemptImpl or 
> RMAppFailedAttemptEvent, so that the RmAppImpl can check the time of the 
> failure.
> Thoughts?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to