[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2331?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14096176#comment-14096176
 ] 

Jason Lowe commented on YARN-2331:
----------------------------------

Ideally the process is self-contained on the NM node so once it has shutdown 
without killing containers it can be immediately restarted on the new release 
to minimize the period where the NM is not responding.  I suppose we could have 
the the shutdown/upgrade script on the NM issue the rmadmin command then wait 
for the NM to receive the RM command and exit.

I think it would be cleaner if we didn't have to involve the RM.  However I 
don't feel so strongly that I'd object if we can't find a nice way to do this 
with just the NM node.

> Distinguish shutdown during supervision vs. shutdown for rolling upgrade
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-2331
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2331
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: nodemanager
>    Affects Versions: 2.6.0
>            Reporter: Jason Lowe
>
> When the NM is shutting down with restart support enabled there are scenarios 
> we'd like to distinguish and behave accordingly:
> # The NM is running under supervision.  In that case containers should be 
> preserved so the automatic restart can recover them.
> # The NM is not running under supervision and a rolling upgrade is not being 
> performed.  In that case the shutdown should kill all containers since it is 
> unlikely the NM will be restarted in a timely manner to recover them.
> # The NM is not running under supervision and a rolling upgrade is being 
> performed.  In that case the shutdown should not kill all containers since a 
> restart is imminent due to the rolling upgrade and the containers will be 
> recovered.



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

Reply via email to