hadoop-yarn-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Varun Saxena (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Assigned] (YARN-5357) Timeline service v2 integration with Federation
Date Mon, 08 Aug 2016 09:59:20 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-5357?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Varun Saxena reassigned YARN-5357:
----------------------------------

    Assignee: Varun Saxena

> Timeline service v2 integration with Federation 
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-5357
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-5357
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: timelineserver
>            Reporter: Vrushali C
>            Assignee: Varun Saxena
>
> Jira to note the discussion points from an initial chat about integrating Timeline Service
v2 with Federation (YARN-2915).
> cc [~subru] [~curino] 
> For Federation:
> - all entities that belong to the same flow run should have the same cluster name
> - app id in the same flow run strongly ordered in time
> - need a logical cluster name and physical cluster name
> - a possibility to implement the Application TimelineCollector as an interceptor in the
AMRMProxyService.
> For Timeline Service:
> - need to store physical cluster id and logical cluster id so that we don't lose information
at any level (flow/app/entity etc)
> - add a  new table app id to cluster mapping table
> - need a different entity table/some table to store node level metrics for physical cluster
stats. Once we get to node-level rollup, we probably have to store something in a dc, cluster,
rack, node hierarchy. In that case a physical cluster makes sense, but we'd still need some
way to tie physical and logical together in order to make automatic error detection etc that
we're envisioning feasible within a federated setup.
> For the Cluster Naming convention:
> - three situations for cluster name:
> ----> app submitted to router should take federated (aka logical) cluster name
> ----> app submitted directly to RM should take physical cluster name
> ----> Info about the physical cluster  in entities?
> - suggestion to set the cluster name as yarn tag at the router level (in the app submission
context) 
> Other points to note:
> - for federation to work smoothly in environments that use HDFS some additional considerations
are needed, and possibly some solution like what is being used at Twitter with the nFly approach.
> Email thread context:
> {code}
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Joep Rottinghuis 
> Date: Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Federation -Timeline Service meeting notes
> To: Subramaniam Venkatraman Krishnan 
> Cc: Sangjin Lee, Vrushali Channapattan , Carlo Curino
> Thanks for the notes.
> I think that for federation to work smoothly in environments that use HDFS some additional
considerations are needed, and possibly some solution like what we're using at Twitter with
our nFly approach.
> bq. - need a different entity table/some table to store node level metrics for physical
cluster stats
> Once we get to node-level rollup, we probably have to store something in a dc, cluster,
rack, node hierarchy. In that case a physical cluster makes sense, but we'd still need some
way to tie physical and logical together in order to make automatic error detection etc that
we're envisioning feasible within a federated setup.
> Cheers,
> Joep
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Subramaniam Venkatraman Krishnan  wrote:
>     Thanks Vrushali for crisply capturing the essential from our rambling discussion
J.
>      
>     Sangjin, I just want to add one comment to yours – we want to retain the physical
cluster name (possibly as a new entity type) so that we don’t lose information & we
can cluster level rollups even if they are not efficient.
>      
>     Additionally, based on the walkthrough of Federation design:
>     ·         There was general agreement with the proposed approach.
>     ·         There is a possibility to implement the Application TimelineCollector
as an interceptor in the AMRMProxyService.
>     ·         Joep raised the concern that it would be better if the RMs obtain the
epoch from FederationStateStore. This is not currently in the roadmap of our MVP but we definitely
plan to address this in future.
>      
>     Regards,
>     Subru
>      
>     From: Sangjin Lee
>     Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 6:22 PM
>     To: Vrushali Channapattan 
>     Cc: Joep Rottinghuis; Carlo Curino; Subramaniam Venkatraman Krishnan 
>     Subject: Re: Federation -Timeline Service meeting notes
>      
>     Thanks for the summary Vrushali!
>      
>     Just so that we're on the same page regarding the terminology, I understand we're
using the terms "logical cluster" and "federated cluster" interchangeably.
>      
>     Also, between using the federated cluster name and the home cluster name as a solution,
I think we were leaning towards the federated cluster name (although not concluded).
>      
>     On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Vrushali Channapattan wrote:
>          
>         For Federation:
>         - all entities that belong to the same flow run should have the same cluster
name
>         - app id in the same flow run strongly ordered in time
>         - need a logical cluster name and physical cluster name
>         For Timeline Service:
>         - need to store physical cluster id and logical cluster id so that we don't lose
information at any level (flow/app/entity etc)
>         - add a  new table app id to cluster mapping table
>         - need a different entity table/some table to store node level metrics for physical
cluster stats
>         For the Cluster Naming convention:
>         - three situations for cluster name:
>         ----> app submitted to router should take federated cluster name
>         ----> app submitted directly to RM should take physical cluster name
>         ----> Info about the physical cluster  in entities?
>         - suggestion to set the cluster name as yarn tag at the router level (in the
app submission context)
>  {code}



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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org


Mime
View raw message