[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3020?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14284327#comment-14284327
 ] 

Wei Yan commented on YARN-3020:
-------------------------------

[~peterdkirchner], I'll look it later today.

> n similar addContainerRequest()s produce n*(n+1)/2 containers
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-3020
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3020
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: client
>    Affects Versions: 2.5.0, 2.6.0, 2.5.1, 2.5.2
>            Reporter: Peter D Kirchner
>   Original Estimate: 24h
>  Remaining Estimate: 24h
>
> BUG: If the application master calls addContainerRequest() n times, but with 
> the same priority, I get up to 1+2+3+...+n containers = n*(n+1)/2 .  The most 
> containers are requested when the interval between calls to 
> addContainerRequest() exceeds the heartbeat interval of calls to allocate() 
> (in AMRMClientImpl's run() method).
> If the application master calls addContainerRequest() n times, but with a 
> unique priority each time, I get n containers (as I intended).
> Analysis:
> There is a logic problem in AMRMClientImpl.java.
> Although AMRMClientImpl.java, allocate() does an ask.clear() , on subsequent 
> calls to addContainerRequest(), addResourceRequest() finds the previous 
> matching remoteRequest and increments the container count rather than 
> starting anew, and does an addResourceRequestToAsk() which defeats the 
> ask.clear().
> From documentation and code comments, it was hard for me to discern the 
> intended behavior of the API, but the inconsistency reported in this issue 
> suggests one case or the other is implemented incorrectly.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to