[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4311?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15235358#comment-15235358
]
Jason Lowe commented on YARN-4311:
----------------------------------
If we only remove truly untracked nodes then option 1 should be OK. Therefore
we won't remove LOST nodes that are still listed in the include list, and
admins can see that those nodes are still supposed to be part of the cluster
but are not currently active.
> Removing nodes from include and exclude lists will not remove them from
> decommissioned nodes list
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-4311
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4311
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.6.1
> Reporter: Kuhu Shukla
> Assignee: Kuhu Shukla
> Attachments: YARN-4311-branch-2.7.001.patch,
> YARN-4311-branch-2.7.002.patch, YARN-4311-branch-2.7.003.patch,
> YARN-4311-branch-2.7.004.patch, YARN-4311-v1.patch, YARN-4311-v10.patch,
> YARN-4311-v11.patch, YARN-4311-v11.patch, YARN-4311-v12.patch,
> YARN-4311-v13.patch, YARN-4311-v13.patch, YARN-4311-v14.patch,
> YARN-4311-v2.patch, YARN-4311-v3.patch, YARN-4311-v4.patch,
> YARN-4311-v5.patch, YARN-4311-v6.patch, YARN-4311-v7.patch,
> YARN-4311-v8.patch, YARN-4311-v9.patch
>
>
> In order to fully forget about a node, removing the node from include and
> exclude list is not sufficient. The RM lists it under Decomm-ed nodes. The
> tricky part that [~jlowe] pointed out was the case when include lists are not
> used, in that case we don't want the nodes to fall off if they are not active.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
