[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3101?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14298887#comment-14298887
]
Sandy Ryza commented on YARN-3101:
----------------------------------
[~adhoot] is this the same condition that's evaluated when reserving a resource
in the first place? I.e. might we ever make a reservation and then immediately
end up canceling it?
Also, I believe [~l201514] is correct that
reservedAppSchedulable.getResource(reservedPriority))) will not return the
right quantity and node.getReservedContainer().getReservedResource() is
correct.
Last of all, while we're at it, can we rename "fitInMaxShare" to
"fitsInMaxShare"?
> FairScheduler#fitInMaxShare was added to validate reservations but it does
> not consider it
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-3101
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3101
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: fairscheduler
> Reporter: Anubhav Dhoot
> Assignee: Anubhav Dhoot
> Attachments: YARN-3101-Siqi.v1.patch, YARN-3101.001.patch,
> YARN-3101.002.patch
>
>
> YARN-2811 added fitInMaxShare to validate reservations on a queue, but did
> not count it during its calculations. It also had the condition reversed so
> the test was still passing because both cancelled each other.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
