[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4284?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14968248#comment-14968248
 ] 

Jian He commented on YARN-4284:
-------------------------------

bq. Currently there is an inherent affinity to nodes when it comes to assigning 
the AM containers. 
I have one question why it has inherent affinity to nodes when assigning AM 
containers? Is this how you see in real scenario ?
IIUC,  AM container request is 'any', so allocation will be based on node 
heartbeat - whichever node comes first will allocate the AM container ?

> condition for AM blacklisting is too narrow
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-4284
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4284
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: resourcemanager
>    Affects Versions: 2.8.0
>            Reporter: Sangjin Lee
>            Assignee: Sangjin Lee
>         Attachments: YARN-4284.001.patch
>
>
> Per YARN-2005, there is now a way to blacklist nodes for AM purposes so the 
> next app attempt can be assigned to a different node.
> However, currently the condition under which the node gets blacklisted is 
> limited to {{DISKS_FAILED}}. There are a whole host of other issues that may 
> cause the failure, for which we want to locate the AM elsewhere; e.g. disks 
> full, JVM crashes, memory issues, etc.
> Since the AM blacklisting is per-app, there is little practical downside in 
> blacklisting the nodes on *any failure* (although it might lead to 
> blacklisting the node more aggressively than necessary). I would propose 
> locating the next app attempt to a different node on any failure.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to