[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-5124?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Arun Suresh updated YARN-5124:
------------------------------
Attachment: YARN-5124.003.patch
[~curino],
bq. I think the cleaner semantic should be: 1. I can ask for different
container types at the same priority level. 2. Priority ranks for different
container types are non-comparable (i.e., G@P0 might be served before or after
O@P1).
Yup, agree to your argument that it is really not necessary to enforce the
constraint that different container type requests should go at different
priority levels.
I have updated the patch to remove the constraint. Please do take a look..
> Modify AMRMClient to set the ExecutionType in the ResourceRequest
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-5124
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-5124
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Arun Suresh
> Assignee: Arun Suresh
> Attachments: YARN-5124.001.patch, YARN-5124.002.patch,
> YARN-5124.003.patch
>
>
> Currently the {{ContainerRequest}} allows the AM to set the {{ExecutionType}}
> in the AMRMClient, but it is not being set in the actual {{ResourceRequest}}
> that is sent to the RM
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
