Ben, there are two scenarios: executor shutdown and killTask() in CommandExecutor. For the first use case, each custom executor is affected through the ExecutorProcess, that means two levels are involved (containerizer and executor) and should be synchronized.
In the second scenario, each task is tied to its own CommandExecutor, therefore killing a task implies killing its executor. In this case, grace shutdown period becomes also a signal escalation timeout and conflating them together, I think, is a good idea. The proposed design doc is an effort to align timeouts along the chain from slave to CommanExecutor. If I understand you correctly, we want to shutdown any executor (task) gracefully, and do not tie grace period to CommandExecutor only. A good example pointed by Ankur Chauhan is MESOS-1925 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1925>: we can reuse reuse the same grace shutdown flag for dockers. And if we later enable frameworks to adjust timeouts for its tasks (or executors, to be precise), we will be able to align the timeout used by docker finalization with the timeout in docker container. On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Benjamin Mahler <benjamin.mah...@gmail.com > wrote: > I'm guessing most of the motivation here is actually for task killing > escalation in the command executor? The shutdown grace period was designed > for executor shutdown only, which today occurs only when the framework is > being shutdown (or recovery is cleaning up), or in the future, when > frameworks ask to shutdown a specific executor. > > In the case of the command executor, the slave won't do any escalation when > a killTask arrives, since it's not trying to shutdown the executor. For > simplicity (I'm guessing), we conflated the executor shutdown grace period, > with the killTask signal escalation in the command executor. > > So, I'm still trying to figure out the concrete use case here, is it that > you have command-tasks that implement a clean shutdown driven by SIGTERM? > Going forward, is that enough or would we want a more general notion of > "Finalization" (e.g. driven by HTTP, or SIGTERM, or subprocess, etc), much > like the generic health checking that was added. > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 8:08 AM, Alex Rukletsov <a...@mesosphere.io> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I would like to share the design doc for configurable grace period > > < > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_b3OPv3tjkub1T6VhQ27GnDfbVjnJ6IQ4ufPQhV1HM8/edit?usp=sharing > > >. > > The doc describes two approaches to calculate nested grace periods, > points > > out implementation details and opens several design questions. > > > > I would highly appreciate any thoughts, ideas and suggestions! > > > > Thanks, > > Alex > > >
