hadoop-yarn-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Wangda Tan (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (YARN-4390) Do surgical preemption based on reserved container in CapacityScheduler
Date Tue, 26 Apr 2016 00:01:24 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4390?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15257292#comment-15257292

Wangda Tan commented on YARN-4390:


Thanks for comments:

bq. 1. In CapacitySchedulerPreemptionUtils#deductPreemptableResourcesBasedSelectedCandidates,
partition is retrieved from SchedulerNode...
Retriving it from SchedulerNode is because scheduler handles node label changes asynchronizely,
and preemption policy should make decision based on scheduler's state. And it doesn't have
bad performance issue as well.

bq. 2. context.getQueueByPartition has a code path flow to return NULL...
Modified patch, now throw YarnRuntimeException when null happens and handled it outside. (skips
the preemption run)

bq. 3 3. From FifoCandidatesSelector,...
This is a good point. However, since we have different ways to calculate ideal resource allocation,
which belongs to selector, such as:
Deduct resources should happen after ideal allocation as well.

bq. 4. One doubt about the newly changed PreemptableResourceCalculator ctor...
Since PreemptableResourceCalculator belongs to Selector, PreemptionContext doesn't know what's
the correct value of considersReservedResourceWhenCalculateIdeal. 
Added a simple Java doc to PreemptableResourceCalculator constructor for more details.

bq. 5. getNodesForPreemption in ReservedContainerCandidatesSelector has to scan all nodes
in cluster
Jian has similar concern, will run benchmark tests for this.

bq. 6. In ReservedContainerCandidatesSelector, containers are sorted against launch time.
Launch time may not be correct because we should respect FIFO. I think we should consider
more about this, for example, application priority, etc. In latest patch I updated it to sort
based on containerId (reverse order), we can do more work for it in a separate patch

bq. 7. As I see RMContainer is read-only interface. I feel setQueueName can be moved out from
this interface and place in RMContainer...

bq. Minor comments ..
All addressed.

> Do surgical preemption based on reserved container in CapacityScheduler
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: YARN-4390
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4390
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: capacity scheduler
>    Affects Versions: 3.0.0, 2.8.0, 2.7.3
>            Reporter: Eric Payne
>            Assignee: Wangda Tan
>         Attachments: YARN-4390-design.1.pdf, YARN-4390-test-results.pdf, YARN-4390.1.patch,
YARN-4390.2.patch, YARN-4390.3.branch-2.patch, YARN-4390.3.patch, YARN-4390.4.patch, YARN-4390.5.patch,
> There are multiple reasons why preemption could unnecessarily preempt containers. One
is that an app could be requesting a large container (say 8-GB), and the preemption monitor
could conceivably preempt multiple containers (say 8, 1-GB containers) in order to fill the
large container request. These smaller containers would then be rejected by the requesting
AM and potentially given right back to the preempted app.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message