Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1606217EB6 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 08:03:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 53905 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 2015 08:03:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-user-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 53747 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 2015 08:03:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 53737 invoked by uid 99); 26 Apr 2015 08:03:25 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 08:03:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: message received from 54.164.171.186 which is an MX secondary for user@hadoop.apache.org) Received: from [54.164.171.186] (HELO mx1-us-east.apache.org) (54.164.171.186) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 08:03:20 +0000 Received: from mail-ig0-f182.google.com (mail-ig0-f182.google.com [209.85.213.182]) by mx1-us-east.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-east.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 0DFAF42996 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 08:03:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by igbhj9 with SMTP id hj9so42343395igb.1 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 01:02:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=a9zX72s5typeg86Kpcxa+TSg8D1SxW9ZjTJ/79HCmYA=; b=mZHQTxbGgo+jMrFxIoXzgnFUZzacQtVB0JrQrz4HNNZW3wdhW3kJBW6yFoT25MnxXv 9h51wNSpvraOZF0WLymW0At03b01s6CphP6RVj+GuIRIjXlVHN7XleaXmazLaSQAMYwb wICcZhQsvhkqXGLu95V82HWNY6YYcoBaMsXmubCZODP82cM3ix3ISYn6hatkHFTWwhTi aKhjLWK28YrIlCQS54K3kI1dXFKqCoStgszPHF5MMR0n8QqzXB1tNvzddhmG2X4cyp8X yjUfRrVyOjt/Zv1Ga/zV5yo+LrgfUEl9EQImmGAa5Fa73AXm+Q+A7cUyZd7kFSywlPby tUlg== X-Received: by 10.107.3.17 with SMTP id 17mr7269238iod.60.1430035379703; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 01:02:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.36.108.65 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 01:02:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Zhe Li Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:02:19 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is there any way to limit the concurrent running mappers per job? To: user@hadoop.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113fd3b6d2d59b05149c0ed0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001a113fd3b6d2d59b05149c0ed0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Great, thanks you guys. On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Naganarasimha G R (Naga) < garlanaganarasimha@huawei.com> wrote: > Thanks for the info Harsh, > MAPREDUCE-5583 also states the scenario where this configuration would be > useful ! > > +Naga > ________________________________________ > From: Harsh J [harsh@cloudera.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 11:24 > To: > Subject: Re: Is there any way to limit the concurrent running mappers per > job? > > This has been introduced as a 2.7.0 feature, see MAPREDUCE-5583. > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Zhe Li wrote: > > Hi, after upgraded to Hadoop 2 (yarn), I found that > > 'mapred.jobtracker.taskScheduler.maxRunningTasksPerJob' no longer worked, > > right? > > > > One workaround is to use queue to limit it, but it's not easy to control > it > > from job submitter. > > Is there any way to limit the concurrent running mappers per job? > > Any documents or discussions before? > > > > BTW, any way to search this mailing list before I post a new question? > > > > Thanks very much. > > > > -- > Harsh J > --001a113fd3b6d2d59b05149c0ed0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Great, thanks you guys.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Naganarasimh= a G R (Naga) <garlanaganarasimha@huawei.com> wro= te:
Thanks for the info Harsh,
MAPREDUCE-5583 also states the scenario where this configuration would be u= seful !

+Naga
________________________________________
From: Harsh J [harsh@cloudera.com= ]
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 11:24
To: <user@hadoop.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Is there any way to limit the concurrent running mappers per j= ob?

This has been introduced as a 2.7.0 feature, see MAPREDUCE-5583.

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Zhe Li <
allenlee.lz@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, after upgraded to Hadoop 2 (yarn), I found that
> 'mapred.jobtracker.taskScheduler.maxRunningTasksPerJob' no lon= ger worked,
> right?
>
> One workaround is to use queue to limit it, but it's not easy to c= ontrol it
> from job submitter.
> Is there any way to limit the concurrent running mappers per job?
> Any documents or discussions before?
>
> BTW, any way to search this mailing list before I post a new question?=
>
> Thanks very much.



--
Harsh J

--001a113fd3b6d2d59b05149c0ed0--