hadoop-yarn-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eli Reisman (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (YARN-226) Log aggregation should not assume an AppMaster will have containerId 1
Date Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:36:14 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-226?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13602614#comment-13602614

Eli Reisman commented on YARN-226:

Hmm, that stirs up some trouble. Giraph tasks may or may not need to be
contiguous ID's but will need a "task 0" for at least one of the reserved
containers (so container 2 right now is the one) in order to bootstrap our
master election process. I am using container Id's to translate into giraph
task Id's rigth now by just subtracting two from container Id! It works in
all my tests, but the reservation thing could kick in on big asks (1000
container ask etc.) is that what you're saying? How big can the ask be?

Perhaps I can move this bootstrap stuff from Giraph into my app master if
this is a big problem. Good to know, thanks!

> Log aggregation should not assume an AppMaster will have containerId 1
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: YARN-226
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-226
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Siddharth Seth
> In case of reservcations, etc - AppMasters may not get container id 1. We likely need
additional info in the CLC / tokens indicating whether a container is an AM or not.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

View raw message