Mailing-List: contact yarn-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 16:54:46 +0000 (UTC)
From: "MENG DING (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12861430.1441238461000.258568.1441385686056@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12861430.1441238461000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.12861430.1441238461000@Atlassian.JIRA>
 <JIRA.12861430.1441238461174@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (YARN-4108) CapacityScheduler: Improve
 preemption to preempt only those containers that would satisfy the incoming
 request
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4108?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14731048#comment-14731048 ] 

MENG DING commented on YARN-4108:
---------------------------------

Hi, [~leftnoteasy]

I also feel that the logic you proposed is a good staring point overall. Just want to confirm that I understand it correctly. For pending asks with hard locality requirements, I think this logic works the best. However, for other pending asks, are we able to achieve optimal preemption (i.e. sufficiently preemptable resources with the lowest cost of preemption as per [~jlowe])? For example, just because {{node.available + preemptable > application.next_request}} doesn't necessarily mean that the preemption cost is the lowest on this node. Maybe we need to have a combination of reservation continuous looking + delayed scheduling mechanism to ensure that we have done calculation of preemption cost on enough hosts for the pending ask. But then I feel this approach might be too expensive ...

> CapacityScheduler: Improve preemption to preempt only those containers that would satisfy the incoming request
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-4108
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4108
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: capacity scheduler
>            Reporter: Wangda Tan
>            Assignee: Wangda Tan
>
> This is sibling JIRA for YARN-2154. We should make sure container preemption is more effective.
> *Requirements:*:
> 1) Can handle case of user-limit preemption
> 2) Can handle case of resource placement requirements, such as: hard-locality (I only want to use rack-1) / node-constraints (YARN-3409) / black-list (I don't want to use rack1 and host\[1-3\])
> 3) Can handle preemption within a queue: cross user preemption (YARN-2113), cross applicaiton preemption (such as priority-based (YARN-1963) / fairness-based (YARN-3319)).


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)