[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4945?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15494394#comment-15494394
]
Eric Payne commented on YARN-4945:
----------------------------------
bq. I would say it may not be necessarily to have two separate policies to
consider priority and user-limit.
[~leftnoteasy], I'm not sure how I feel about that yet. I need to understand
what it would mean to combine all intra-queue priority policies into one.
Whatever the design, I want to make sure it is not cumbersome to solve the
user-limit-percent inversion that we often see.
If they are combined, then is it still necessary to make
{{IntraQueuePreemptionPolicy}} an interface? Wouldn't this just be the
implementation class and then there would be no need for
{{PriorityIntraQueuePreemptionPolicy}} or other derivative classes?
> [Umbrella] Capacity Scheduler Preemption Within a queue
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-4945
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4945
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Wangda Tan
> Attachments: Intra-Queue Preemption Use Cases.pdf,
> IntraQueuepreemption-CapacityScheduler (Design).pdf, YARN-2009-wip.2.patch,
> YARN-2009-wip.patch, YARN-2009-wip.v3.patch, YARN-2009.v0.patch,
> YARN-2009.v1.patch, YARN-2009.v2.patch
>
>
> This is umbrella ticket to track efforts of preemption within a queue to
> support features like:
> YARN-2009. YARN-2113. YARN-4781.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
