[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14010?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16932423#comment-16932423
]
TisonKun commented on FLINK-14010:
----------------------------------
I have thought of this. The problem is that when the situation described here
happens, we actually complete {{ResourceManager#getTerminationFuture}}
normally, which cannot be sourced that it comes from
{{YarnResourceManager#onShutdownRequest}}.
If we achieve the function by using {{ResourceManager#getTerminationFuture}} to
trigger the shut down of the {{DispatcherResourceManagerComponent}}, the
assumption is:
If ResourceManager is closed first(since termination future completes normally
in both cases, we cannot distinguish by {{whenComplete}}), it infers an
exceptionally status so that we should complete
{{DispatcherResourceManagerComponent#getShutDownFuture}} exceptionally.
Otherwise ResourceManager closes normally by other triggers, and the either
{{DispatcherResourceManagerComponent#getShutDownFuture}} is already completed
or {{ClusterEntrypoint#shutdownAsync}} is guarded to be executed once.
I think this assumption is counter-intuitive that ResourceManager terminates
"normally" but we complete shutdownFuture exceptionally.
> Dispatcher & JobManagers don't give up leadership when AM is shut down
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-14010
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14010
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Deployment / YARN, Runtime / Coordination
> Affects Versions: 1.7.2, 1.8.1, 1.9.0, 1.10.0
> Reporter: TisonKun
> Priority: Critical
>
> In YARN deployment scenario, YARN RM possibly launches a new AM for the job
> even if the previous AM does not terminated, for example, when AMRM heartbeat
> timeout. This is a common case that RM will send a shutdown request to the
> previous AM and expect the AM shutdown properly.
> However, currently in {{YARNResourceManager}}, we handle this request in
> {{onShutdownRequest}} which simply close the {{YARNResourceManager}} *but not
> Dispatcher and JobManagers*. Thus, Dispatcher and JobManager launched in new
> AM cannot be granted leadership properly. Visually,
> on previous AM: Dispatcher leader, JM leaders
> on new AM: ResourceManager leader
> since on client side or in per-job mode, JobManager address and port are
> configured as the new AM, the whole cluster goes into an unrecoverable
> inconsistent status: client all queries the dispatcher on new AM who is now
> the leader. Briefly, Dispatcher and JobManagers on previous AM do not give up
> their leadership properly.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
