[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2637?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14274029#comment-14274029
]
Wangda Tan commented on YARN-2637:
----------------------------------
[~cwelch],
Thanks for updating, reviewed latest patch, some comments:
*LeafQueue.java:*
1) getUserAMResourceLimit()
I think according to how we compute user-limit in LeafQueue, should we do it
following way to compute user-am-resource-limit?
{code}
user-am-resource-limit =
am-resource-percent * min(
queue-max-capacity * max(user-limit, 1/#active-user),
queue-configured-capacity * user-limit-factor)?
{code}
Thoughts?
*FiCaSchedulerApp.java:*
2) Is it necessary to get scheduler instance just for minimum allocation, do
you think is it better to just get minimum allocation using:
{code}
minAllocMb = rmContext.getConf().getInt(
YarnConfiguration.RM_SCHEDULER_MINIMUM_ALLOCATION_MB,
YarnConfiguration.DEFAULT_RM_SCHEDULER_MINIMUM_ALLOCATION_MB);
{code}
Which can avoid creating mocked scheduler in some of test changes, including
changes in RMContext.java.
*TestApplicationLimits:*
3) I think RMContext.getRMApps can be updated directly, it's no need to spy it,
I suggest avoid spying objects in tests as much as we can. It's not very
understandable and easily cause problems when we update implementations.
4) Such spy invokes are unnecessary?
{code}
FiCaSchedulerApp app_0_0 =
spy(new FiCaSchedulerApp(appAttemptId_0_0, user_0, queue,
{code}
5) Nobody is using it, should remove it.
{code}
private FiCaSchedulerApp getMockApplication(int appId, String user) {
return getMockApplication(appId, user, Resource.newInstance(0, 0));
}
{code}
Wangda
> maximum-am-resource-percent could be respected for both LeafQueue/User when
> trying to activate applications.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-2637
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2637
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: resourcemanager
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Wangda Tan
> Assignee: Craig Welch
> Priority: Critical
> Attachments: YARN-2637.0.patch, YARN-2637.1.patch,
> YARN-2637.12.patch, YARN-2637.13.patch, YARN-2637.15.patch,
> YARN-2637.16.patch, YARN-2637.17.patch, YARN-2637.18.patch,
> YARN-2637.19.patch, YARN-2637.2.patch, YARN-2637.20.patch,
> YARN-2637.21.patch, YARN-2637.22.patch, YARN-2637.23.patch,
> YARN-2637.25.patch, YARN-2637.26.patch, YARN-2637.27.patch,
> YARN-2637.28.patch, YARN-2637.29.patch, YARN-2637.30.patch,
> YARN-2637.31.patch, YARN-2637.32.patch, YARN-2637.36.patch,
> YARN-2637.38.patch, YARN-2637.39.patch, YARN-2637.6.patch, YARN-2637.7.patch,
> YARN-2637.9.patch
>
>
> Currently, number of AM in leaf queue will be calculated in following way:
> {code}
> max_am_resource = queue_max_capacity * maximum_am_resource_percent
> #max_am_number = max_am_resource / minimum_allocation
> #max_am_number_for_each_user = #max_am_number * userlimit * userlimit_factor
> {code}
> And when submit new application to RM, it will check if an app can be
> activated in following way:
> {code}
> for (Iterator<FiCaSchedulerApp> i=pendingApplications.iterator();
> i.hasNext(); ) {
> FiCaSchedulerApp application = i.next();
>
> // Check queue limit
> if (getNumActiveApplications() >= getMaximumActiveApplications()) {
> break;
> }
>
> // Check user limit
> User user = getUser(application.getUser());
> if (user.getActiveApplications() <
> getMaximumActiveApplicationsPerUser()) {
> user.activateApplication();
> activeApplications.add(application);
> i.remove();
> LOG.info("Application " + application.getApplicationId() +
> " from user: " + application.getUser() +
> " activated in queue: " + getQueueName());
> }
> }
> {code}
> An example is,
> If a queue has capacity = 1G, max_am_resource_percent = 0.2, the maximum
> resource that AM can use is 200M, assuming minimum_allocation=1M, #am can be
> launched is 200, and if user uses 5M for each AM (> minimum_allocation). All
> apps can still be activated, and it will occupy all resource of a queue
> instead of only a max_am_resource_percent of a queue.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
