hadoop-yarn-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (YARN-947) Defining the history data classes for the implementation of the reading/writing interface
Date Wed, 23 Oct 2013 22:04:43 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-947?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13803391#comment-13803391
] 

Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli commented on YARN-947:
----------------------------------------------

Turns out  ContainerHistoryData is a server side record that is used only by the reader. In
that case, we can keep it in the server package but I don't think it should be a pb implementation.

Thinking beyond, may be we should ditch AppilcationHistoryData etc completely and simply use
ApplicationReport, ApplicationAttemptReport etc in the Reader. Thoughts?

> Defining the history data classes for the implementation of the reading/writing interface
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-947
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-947
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Zhijie Shen
>            Assignee: Zhijie Shen
>             Fix For: YARN-321
>
>         Attachments: YARN-947.1.patch, YARN-947.2.patch, YARN-947.3.patch, YARN-947.4.patch,
YARN-947.5.patch, YARN-947.6.patch
>
>
> We need to define the history data classes have the exact fields to be stored. Therefore,
all the implementations don't need to have the duplicate logic to exact the required information
from RMApp, RMAppAttempt and RMContainer.
> We use protobuf to define these classes, such that they can be ser/des to/from bytes,
which are easier for persistence.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)

Mime
View raw message