hadoop-yarn-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Konstantinos Karanasos (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (YARN-6593) [API] Introduce Placement Constraint object
Date Tue, 23 May 2017 22:14:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6593?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16021971#comment-16021971

Konstantinos Karanasos commented on YARN-6593:

bq. If the scheduler can handle a single class efficiently, we don't need a separate representation
in scheduler side. However as I stated, we don't know this yet.
We should then create subclasses (that will not be consistent with the protobufs) only once
we get convinced that they will lead to more efficient implementation. Why add subclasses
without knowing this is true?

The users will see different constraint types through the builder, as in {{addTargetConstraint}},
{{addCardinalityConstraint}}. If we see that adding them as subclasses is important for implementation,
we can sure go ahead and add them later. The API in the builders will not need to change.

> [API] Introduce Placement Constraint object
> -------------------------------------------
>                 Key: YARN-6593
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6593
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Konstantinos Karanasos
>            Assignee: Konstantinos Karanasos
>         Attachments: YARN-6593.001.patch, YARN-6593.002.patch
> This JIRA introduces an object for defining placement constraints.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

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

View raw message