Wangda Tan commented on YARN-3079:

Thanks for reply,
bq. This is discussable. I prefer to keep the current signature beca
Make sense

bq. I think it is not completely equivalent . because when you call 
IMHO, I think they're exchangeable, update a node = remove then add. Its state 
is discrete, so it is safe to make it "disappear" for very short time. I think 
it's very important to keep code clean. 

Beyond this, patch looks good.

> Scheduler should also update maximumAllocation when updateNodeResource.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: YARN-3079
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3079
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: zhihai xu
>            Assignee: zhihai xu
>         Attachments: YARN-3079.000.patch, YARN-3079.001.patch, 
> YARN-3079.002.patch
> Scheduler should also update maximumAllocation when updateNodeResource. 
> Otherwise even the node resource is changed by 
> AdminService#updateNodeResource, maximumAllocation won't be changed.
> Also RMNodeReconnectEvent called from 
> ResourceTrackerService#registerNodeManager will also trigger 
> AbstractYarnScheduler#updateNodeResource being called.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to