Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-yarn-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-yarn-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45AEA187DD for ; Fri, 25 Dec 2015 02:13:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 77794 invoked by uid 500); 25 Dec 2015 02:13:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-yarn-issues-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 77745 invoked by uid 500); 25 Dec 2015 02:13:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact yarn-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 77734 invoked by uid 99); 25 Dec 2015 02:13:50 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Dec 2015 02:13:50 +0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arcas (Postfix) with ESMTP id C34A62C1F76 for ; Fri, 25 Dec 2015 02:13:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 02:13:49 +0000 (UTC) From: "Karthik Kambatla (JIRA)" To: yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (YARN-1856) cgroups based memory monitoring for containers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1856?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15071322#comment-15071322 ] Karthik Kambatla commented on YARN-1856: ---------------------------------------- bq. Ideally oom_control, swappiness would be set by the AM/YARN client and should be container specific settings. If we don't disable oom_control, wouldn't the current implementation kill containers as soon as they spike their usage over the configured hard limit which appears to be the container size? I feel this is too aggressive especially considering how a delayed GC could cause this so easily. No? I see your point about an application deciding whether its containers should be paused/killed. I think the default should be paused, i.e., disabled. bq. In general, we need an API to set container executor specific settings - we've seen a need for this when adding Docker support and now for CGroups settings as well. Would like to understand this better. May be we should take this to another JIRA. I am open to discussing this offline before filing this JIRA and posting our thoughts there. > cgroups based memory monitoring for containers > ---------------------------------------------- > > Key: YARN-1856 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1856 > Project: Hadoop YARN > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: nodemanager > Affects Versions: 2.3.0 > Reporter: Karthik Kambatla > Assignee: Varun Vasudev > Fix For: 2.9.0 > > Attachments: YARN-1856.001.patch, YARN-1856.002.patch, YARN-1856.003.patch, YARN-1856.004.patch > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)