Wangda Tan commented on YARN-2004:

Some comments:
1) I noticed default of default-priority is -1, do you think we should limit 
priority >= 0? With existing interface in queue, we don't limit the "lowest" 
priority, so maybe we should limit it ourselves.
2) Beyond priority settings on queue, do you think we should have per-user 
priority setting? If we don't limit user's priority, we will end up with all 
users asking for max-priority in the queue. And also user's default could be 
different, CEO's "default" may be max-priority. But this needs input of real 
world use cases. ([~jlowe], thoughts?)
3) null check in app priority comparator still exist, did you mention to remove 
bq.  i can remove NULL check. Will only have a direct compareTo check for 

> Priority scheduling support in Capacity scheduler
> -------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: YARN-2004
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2004
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: capacityscheduler
>            Reporter: Sunil G
>            Assignee: Sunil G
>         Attachments: 0001-YARN-2004.patch, 0002-YARN-2004.patch, 
> 0003-YARN-2004.patch, 0004-YARN-2004.patch, 0005-YARN-2004.patch
> Based on the priority of the application, Capacity Scheduler should be able 
> to give preference to application while doing scheduling.
> Comparator<FiCaSchedulerApp> applicationComparator can be changed as below.   
> 1.    Check for Application priority. If priority is available, then return 
> the highest priority job.
> 2.    Otherwise continue with existing logic such as App ID comparison and 
> then TimeStamp comparison.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to