Junping Du commented on YARN-3391:

Sorry for coming a little late. Thanks guys for good discussions here and 
[~zjshen] for updating the patch!
bq. I just wanted to add my 2 cents that this is something we already see and 
experience with hRaven so it's not theoretical.
+1, [~sjlee0]! I think that's very important feedback for improving user 
experience for new feature here. Let's try to get a good balance between 
addressing these solid scenarios as well as providing flexibility to possible 
new scenarios. e.g. we can provide different flow group policies that user can 
use to group application into flow by name or keeping them as isolated flow, 
etc. Anyway, as everyone's agreement so far, let's continue the discussion on a 
separated JIRA for figuring it out later. 

The patch looks good in overall. However, I still haven't seen we put 
definition of "flow", "flow run" and "flow version" in any places of Javadoc. 
As I mentioned earlier, it should be useful for developers. The official Apache 
feature doc is more user oriented and we can address it later when feature get 

> Clearly define flow ID/ flow run / flow version in API and storage
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: YARN-3391
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3391
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: timelineserver
>            Reporter: Zhijie Shen
>            Assignee: Zhijie Shen
>         Attachments: YARN-3391.1.patch, YARN-3391.2.patch
> To continue the discussion in YARN-3040, let's figure out the best way to 
> describe the flow.
> Some key issues that we need to conclude on:
> - How do we include the flow version in the context so that it gets passed 
> into the collector and to the storage eventually?
> - Flow run id should be a number as opposed to a generic string?
> - Default behavior for the flow run id if it is missing (i.e. client did not 
> set it)
> - How do we handle flow attributes in case of nested levels of flows?

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to