[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3391?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14485237#comment-14485237 ]
Junping Du commented on YARN-3391: ---------------------------------- Thanks [~zjshen] for updating the patch! bq. According to Sangjin's given example, we usually want to identify a flow run by timestamp, which theoretically can be negative to represent sometime before 1970. Except time travel, I don't believe any flow run running on hadoop and new timeline service should happen before 1970. :) Anyway, we do have some practice to check timestamp > 0 (like: MetricsRecordImpl), but more cases sounds like we didn't do this negative check for timestamp. Given this, I am fine with not checking here. v4 patch looks good to me. [~sjlee0], [~vrushalic] and [~jrottinghuis], any additional comments for the patch? > 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, YARN-3391.3.patch, > YARN-3391.4.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 (v6.3.4#6332)