Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12CA6200C36 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:35:09 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 1145E160B79; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:09 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 5BBFE160B69 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:35:08 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 96615 invoked by uid 500); 10 Mar 2017 08:35:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact yarn-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 96604 invoked by uid 99); 10 Mar 2017 08:35:07 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:07 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 06F90185F11 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.651 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.651 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kq2oMvWNd6Pc for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 00B2860DFC for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1A9ADE0959 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 65775243B0 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:04 +0000 (UTC) From: "Tao Jie (JIRA)" To: yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Created] (YARN-6320) FairScheduler:Identifying apps to assign in updateThread MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:35:09 -0000 Tao Jie created YARN-6320: ----------------------------- Summary: FairScheduler:Identifying apps to assign in updateThread Key: YARN-6320 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6320 Project: Hadoop YARN Issue Type: Bug Reporter: Tao Jie In FairScheduler today, we have 1)UpdateThread that update queue/app status, fairshare, starvation info, 2)nodeUpdate triggered by NM heartbeat that do the scheduling. When we handle one nodeUpdate, we will top-down from the root queue to the leafqueues and find the most needy application to allocate container according to queue's fairshare. Also we should sort children at each hierarchy level. My thought is that we have a global sorted {{candidateAppList}} which keeps apps need to assign, and move the logic that "find app that should allocate resource to" from nodeUpdate to UpdateThread. In UpdateThread, we find candidate apps to assign and put them into {{candidateAppList}}. In nodeUpdate, we consume the list and allocate containers to apps. As far as I see, we can have 3 benifits: 1, nodeUpdate() is invoked much more frequently than update() in UpdateThread, especially in a large cluster. As a result we can reduce much unnecessary sorting. 2, It will have better coordination with YARN-5829, we can indicate apps to assign more directly rather than let nodes find the best apps to assign. 3, It seems to be easier to introduce scheduling restricts such as nodelabel, affinity/anti-affinity into FS, since we can pre-allocate containers asynchronously. [~kasha], [~templedf], [~yufeigu] like to hear your thoughts. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org