[
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)
