Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B069200D57 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 06:31:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 39833160BFF; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:05 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B0F5160C00 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 06:31:04 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 62266 invoked by uid 500); 27 Nov 2017 05:31:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact yarn-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 62255 invoked by uid 99); 27 Nov 2017 05:31:03 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:03 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 994DC180272 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.202 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_ASCII_DIVIDERS=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6DyzFv4xV_L7 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id DA62E5F1A0 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 63A6DE0A29 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 162FD241A2 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:00 +0000 (UTC) From: "wuchang (JIRA)" To: yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Updated] (YARN-7561) Why hasContainerForNode return false directly when there is no request of ANY locality? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:31:05 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7561?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] wuchang updated YARN-7561: -------------------------- Description: I am studying the FairScheduler source cod of yarn 2.7.3. By the code of class FSAppAttempt: {code} public boolean hasContainerForNode(Priority prio, FSSchedulerNode node) { ResourceRequest anyRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, ResourceRequest.ANY); ResourceRequest rackRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, node.getRackName()); ResourceRequest nodeRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, node.getNodeName()); return // There must be outstanding requests at the given priority: anyRequest != null && anyRequest.getNumContainers() > 0 && // If locality relaxation is turned off at *-level, there must be a // non-zero request for the node's rack: (anyRequest.getRelaxLocality() || (rackRequest != null && rackRequest.getNumContainers() > 0)) && // If locality relaxation is turned off at rack-level, there must be a // non-zero request at the node: (rackRequest == null || rackRequest.getRelaxLocality() || (nodeRequest != null && nodeRequest.getNumContainers() > 0)) && // The requested container must be able to fit on the node: Resources.lessThanOrEqual(RESOURCE_CALCULATOR, null, anyRequest.getCapability(), node.getRMNode().getTotalCapability()); } {code} I really cannot understand why when there is no anyRequest , *hasContainerForNode()* return false directly without considering whether there is NODE_LOCAL or RACK_LOCAL requests. And , *AppSchedulingInfo.allocateNodeLocal()* and *AppSchedulingInfo.allocateRackLocal()* will also decrease the number of containers for *ResourceRequest.ANY*, this is another place where I feel confused. Really thanks for some prompt. was: I am studying the FairScheduler source cod of yarn 2.7.3. By the code of class FSAppAttempt: {quote} public boolean hasContainerForNode(Priority prio, FSSchedulerNode node) { ResourceRequest anyRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, ResourceRequest.ANY); ResourceRequest rackRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, node.getRackName()); ResourceRequest nodeRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, node.getNodeName()); return // There must be outstanding requests at the given priority: anyRequest != null && anyRequest.getNumContainers() > 0 && // If locality relaxation is turned off at *-level, there must be a // non-zero request for the node's rack: (anyRequest.getRelaxLocality() || (rackRequest != null && rackRequest.getNumContainers() > 0)) && // If locality relaxation is turned off at rack-level, there must be a // non-zero request at the node: (rackRequest == null || rackRequest.getRelaxLocality() || (nodeRequest != null && nodeRequest.getNumContainers() > 0)) && // The requested container must be able to fit on the node: Resources.lessThanOrEqual(RESOURCE_CALCULATOR, null, anyRequest.getCapability(), node.getRMNode().getTotalCapability()); } {quote} I really cannot understand why when there is no anyRequest , *hasContainerForNode()* return false directly without considering whether there is NODE_LOCAL or RACK_LOCAL requests. And , *AppSchedulingInfo.allocateNodeLocal()* and *AppSchedulingInfo.allocateRackLocal()* will also decrease the number of containers for *ResourceRequest.ANY*, this is another place where I feel confused. Really thanks for some prompt. > Why hasContainerForNode return false directly when there is no request of ANY locality? > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: YARN-7561 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7561 > Project: Hadoop YARN > Issue Type: Task > Components: fairscheduler > Affects Versions: 2.7.3 > Reporter: wuchang > > I am studying the FairScheduler source cod of yarn 2.7.3. > By the code of class FSAppAttempt: > {code} > public boolean hasContainerForNode(Priority prio, FSSchedulerNode node) { > ResourceRequest anyRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, ResourceRequest.ANY); > ResourceRequest rackRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, node.getRackName()); > ResourceRequest nodeRequest = getResourceRequest(prio, node.getNodeName()); > > return > // There must be outstanding requests at the given priority: > anyRequest != null && anyRequest.getNumContainers() > 0 && > // If locality relaxation is turned off at *-level, there must be a > // non-zero request for the node's rack: > (anyRequest.getRelaxLocality() || > (rackRequest != null && rackRequest.getNumContainers() > 0)) && > // If locality relaxation is turned off at rack-level, there must be a > // non-zero request at the node: > (rackRequest == null || rackRequest.getRelaxLocality() || > (nodeRequest != null && nodeRequest.getNumContainers() > 0)) && > // The requested container must be able to fit on the node: > Resources.lessThanOrEqual(RESOURCE_CALCULATOR, null, > anyRequest.getCapability(), node.getRMNode().getTotalCapability()); > } > {code} > I really cannot understand why when there is no anyRequest , *hasContainerForNode()* return false directly without considering whether there is NODE_LOCAL or RACK_LOCAL requests. > And , *AppSchedulingInfo.allocateNodeLocal()* and *AppSchedulingInfo.allocateRackLocal()* will also decrease the number of containers for *ResourceRequest.ANY*, this is another place where I feel confused. > Really thanks for some prompt. -- 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