[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6593?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16095440#comment-16095440 ] 

Wangda Tan commented on YARN-6593:
----------------------------------

bq. Do you have specific use cases in mind?
Regarding to LRA, change of cardinality is one of the most important requirement, for example, increase #HTTP-instances for load balancing.

bq. I don't have a clear definition of validity across placement requests ...
All valid concerns to me. I don't think we should spend a lot of time to solve a problem may be nonexistent.

bq. If the workarounds (like submitting a new application or a new set of constraints) are easier to understand  ...
Regarding to the new set of constraint, do you mean user need to cancel the first set of constraints and submit new constraints with different allocation-id? Considering ResourceRequest problem I mentioned in YARN-6594, making SchedulingRequest which sent to scheduler to be immutable might be a good idea. (User can still cancel it, but cannot replace it with new requests). What's your thoughts here? 

> [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
>             Fix For: 3.0.0-alpha3
>
>         Attachments: YARN-6593.001.patch, YARN-6593.002.patch, YARN-6593.003.patch, YARN-6593.004.patch
>
>
> This JIRA introduces an object for defining placement constraints.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

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