[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3139?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15529409#comment-15529409
]
Jian He edited comment on YARN-3139 at 9/28/16 12:10 PM:
---------------------------------------------------------
Patch looks good to me.
bq. Instead of taking readLock, I think we can check if
getNode(container.getNodeId()) == null, and stop if it is.
In the latest patch, do you intend to not check "getNode(container.getNodeId())
== null" ? I think this is possible if a node is removed while the container on
that is being released by AM.
was (Author: jianhe):
Patch looks good to me.
bq. Instead of taking readLock, I think we can check if
getNode(container.getNodeId()) == null, and stop if it is.
In the latest patch, do you intend to not check "getNode(container.getNodeId())
== null" ?
> Improve locks in AbstractYarnScheduler/CapacityScheduler/FairScheduler
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-3139
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3139
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: resourcemanager, scheduler
> Reporter: Wangda Tan
> Assignee: Wangda Tan
> Attachments: YARN-3139.0.patch, YARN-3139.1.patch, YARN-3139.2.patch,
> YARN-3139.3.patch, YARN-3139.4.patch, YARN-3139.5.patch
>
>
> Enhance locks in AbstractYarnScheduler/CapacityScheduler/FairScheduler, as
> mentioned in YARN-3091, a possible solution is using read/write lock. Other
> fine-graind locks for specific purposes / bugs should be addressed in
> separated tickets.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
