[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4195?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15069080#comment-15069080
 ] 

Wangda Tan commented on YARN-4195:
----------------------------------

Hi [~curino],

Thanks for responses, the "unified" label is a great idea, in the future, we 
could add more stuffs such as affinity/anti-affiity to it. (dynamic label to 
say if an app can assign container to a node or not). The dimension of node 
labels sounds not an issue since it has hard limit ({{|partitions|<=K}}, and 
YARN-4476).

I still have some questions. (Just rephrase my previous questions)
1) If we're configuring a scheduler, should we use the individual label (A/B) 
or normalized label (A/B/A_B)?
2) If a resource request want to allocate on "A", is it possible to get 
resource on "A_B"? If yes, is it means scheduler allocates more resource than 
required? (app wants 3GB on "A" only, but scheduler gives app 3GB on "A" and 
"B").

> Support of node-labels in the ReservationSystem "Plan"
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-4195
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4195
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Carlo Curino
>            Assignee: Carlo Curino
>         Attachments: YARN-4195.patch
>
>
> As part of YARN-4193 we need to enhance the InMemoryPlan (and related 
> classes) to track the per-label available resources, as well as the per-label
> reservation-allocations.



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

Reply via email to