hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hadoop QA (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3412) Refactor the scheduler out of the JobTracker
Date Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:53:32 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3412?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12613106#action_12613106
] 

Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-3412:
-----------------------------------

-1 overall.  Here are the results of testing the latest attachment 
  http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12385892/JobScheduler-v9.2.patch
  against trunk revision 676069.

    +1 @author.  The patch does not contain any @author tags.

    -1 tests included.  The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests.
                        Please justify why no tests are needed for this patch.

    -1 javadoc.  The javadoc tool appears to have generated 1 warning messages.

    -1 javac.  The applied patch generated 521 javac compiler warnings (more than the trunk's
current 520 warnings).

    +1 findbugs.  The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings.

    +1 release audit.  The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit
warnings.

    +1 core tests.  The patch passed core unit tests.

    +1 contrib tests.  The patch passed contrib unit tests.

Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2844/testReport/
Findbugs warnings: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2844/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2844/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html
Console output: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2844/console

This message is automatically generated.

> Refactor the scheduler out of the JobTracker
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3412
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3412
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: mapred
>            Reporter: Brice Arnould
>            Assignee: Brice Arnould
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 0.19.0
>
>         Attachments: JobScheduler-v9.1.patch, JobScheduler-v9.2.patch, JobScheduler-v9.patch,
JobScheduler.patch, JobScheduler_v2.patch, JobScheduler_v3.patch, JobScheduler_v3b.patch,
JobScheduler_v4.patch, JobScheduler_v5.patch, JobScheduler_v6.1.patch, JobScheduler_v6.2.patch,
JobScheduler_v6.3.patch, JobScheduler_v6.4.patch, JobScheduler_v6.patch, JobScheduler_v7.1.patch,
JobScheduler_v7.patch, JobScheduler_v8.patch, RackAwareJobScheduler.java, SimpleResourceAwareJobScheduler.java
>
>
> First I would like warn you that my proposition is assumed to be very naive. I just hope
that reading it won't make you lose time.
> h4. The aim
> It seems to me that improving Hadoop scheduling could be very profitable. But, it is
hard to implement and compare schedulers, because the scheduling logic is mixed within the
rest of the JobTracker.
> This bug is the first step of an attempt to improve the Hadoop scheduler. It re-implements
the current scheduling algorithm in a separate class called JobScheduler. This new class is
instantiated in the JobTracker.
> h4. Bug fixed as a side effects
> This patch probably cannot be submited as it is.
> A first difficulty is that it does not have exactly the same behaviour than the current
JobTracker. More precisely, it doesn't re-implement things like code that seems to be never
called or concurency problems.
> I wrote TOCONFIRM where my proposition differ from the current implementation, so you
can find them easily.
> I know that fixing bugs silently is bad. So, independently of what you decide about this
patch, I will open issues for bugs that you confirm.
> h4. Other side effects
> Another side effect of this patch is to add documentation about each step of the scheduling.
I hope that it will help future improvement by lowering the level required to contribute to
the scheduler.
> It also reduces the complexity and the granularity of the JobTracker (making it more
parallel).
> h4. The future
> If you feel that this is a step the right direction, I will try to propose a JobSchedulerInterface
that many JobSchedulers could implement and to propose alternatives to the current « FifoJobScheduler
».  If some of you have ideas about that please tell ^^ I will also open issues for things
marked as FIXME in the patch.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message