[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2009?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15513725#comment-15513725
]
Eric Payne commented on YARN-2009:
----------------------------------
[~leftnoteasy], I have some concerns about this algorithm from above:
{code}
for app in sort-by-fifo-or-priority(apps) {
if (user-to-allocated.get(app.user) < user-limit-resource) {
app.allocated = min(app.used + pending, user-limit-resource -
user-to-allocated.get(app.user));
user-to-allocated.get(app.user) += app.allocated;
} else {
// skip this app because user-limit reached
}
}
{code}
If {{Queue1}} has 100 resources, and if {{user1}} starts {{app1}} at priority 1
that consumes the whole queue, won't {{user1}}'s {{user-limit-resource}} be
100? Then, if {{user1}} starts another app ({{app2}}) at priority 2, won't the
above algorithm skip over {{app2}} because {{user1}} has already achieved its
{{user-limit-resource}}?
> Priority support for preemption in ProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicy
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-2009
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2009
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: capacityscheduler
> Reporter: Devaraj K
> Assignee: Sunil G
> Attachments: YARN-2009.0001.patch, YARN-2009.0002.patch
>
>
> While preempting containers based on the queue ideal assignment, we may need
> to consider preempting the low priority application containers first.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
