Wangda Tan commented on YARN-1198:
I've just taken a look at all sub tasks of this JIRA, I'm wondering if we
should define what is the "headroom" first.
In previous YARN, including YARN-1198 the headroom is defined as "the maximum
resource of an application can get".
And in YARN-2008, the headroom is defined as "the available resource of an
application can get", because we already considered used resource of sibling
I'm afraid if we need add a new field like "guaranteed headroom" of an
application consider its absolute capacity (not maximum capacity) and
user-limits, etc. We may keep both of them because,
- The maximum resource is not always achievible because sum of maximum resource
of leaf queues may excess cluster resource.
- With preemption, resource beyond guaranteed resource will be likely
preempted. It should be consider as a temporary resource.
And with this, AM can,
- Using "guaranteed headroom" to allocate resource which will not be preempted.
- Using "maximum headroom" to try to allocate resource beyond its guaranteed
And in my humble opinion, the "available resource of an application can get"
doesn't make a lot of sense here, and may cause some backward-compatible
problems as well. Because in a dynamic cluster, the number can change rapidly,
it is possible that a cluster is fulfilled by another application just happens
one second after the AM got the "available headroom".
And also, this field can not solve the deadlock problem as well, a malicious
application can ask much more resource of this, or a careless developer totally
ignore this field. The only valid solution in my head is putting such logic
into scheduler side, and enforce resource usage by preemption policy.
Any thoughts? [~jlowe], [~cwelch]
> Capacity Scheduler headroom calculation does not work as expected
> Key: YARN-1198
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1198
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Omkar Vinit Joshi
> Assignee: Omkar Vinit Joshi
> Attachments: YARN-1198.1.patch
> Today headroom calculation (for the app) takes place only when
> * New node is added/removed from the cluster
> * New container is getting assigned to the application.
> However there are potentially lot of situations which are not considered for
> this calculation
> * If a container finishes then headroom for that application will change and
> should be notified to the AM accordingly.
> * If a single user has submitted multiple applications (app1 and app2) to the
> same queue then
> ** If app1's container finishes then not only app1's but also app2's AM
> should be notified about the change in headroom.
> ** Similarly if a container is assigned to any applications app1/app2 then
> both AM should be notified about their headroom.
> ** To simplify the whole communication process it is ideal to keep headroom
> per User per LeafQueue so that everyone gets the same picture (apps belonging
> to same user and submitted in same queue).
> * If a new user submits an application to the queue then all applications
> submitted by all users in that queue should be notified of the headroom
> * Also today headroom is an absolute number ( I think it should be normalized
> but then this is going to be not backward compatible..)
> * Also when admin user refreshes queue headroom has to be updated.
> These all are the potential bugs in headroom calculations
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA