[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-1881?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12897178#action_12897178
]
Luke Lu commented on MAPREDUCE-1881:
------------------------------------
I have no issue with the statusUpdate method. I got where you're coming from :)
But I question "many users will want to do the same thing". I'm curious about
"many useful instrumentation classes being written". Adding features
(especially redundant ones), IMO, doesn't necessarily make Hadoop better but
rather bloated and harder to maintain. You know, "perfection is attained not
when no more can be added, but when no more can be removed."
Another thing about the patch is that if the instrumentation class is specified
as an empty string, it silently defaults to the composite class with a empty
list (essentially a noop instrumentation), which is a behavior change from the
existing behavior: an exception would be thrown.
> Improve TaskTrackerInstrumentation
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: MAPREDUCE-1881
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-1881
> Project: Hadoop Map/Reduce
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Matei Zaharia
> Assignee: Matei Zaharia
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: mapreduce-1881-v2.patch, mapreduce-1881-v2b.patch,
> mapreduce-1881.patch
>
>
> The TaskTrackerInstrumentation class provides a useful way to capture key
> events at the TaskTracker for use in various reporting tools, but it is
> currently rather limited, because only one TaskTrackerInstrumentation can be
> added to a given TaskTracker and this objects receives minimal information
> about tasks (only their IDs). I propose enhancing the functionality through
> two changes:
> # Support a comma-separated list of TaskTrackerInstrumentation classes rather
> than just a single one in the JobConf, and report events to all of them.
> # Make the reportTaskLaunch and reportTaskEnd methods in
> TaskTrackerInstrumentation receive a reference to a whole Task object rather
> than just its TaskAttemptID. It might also be useful to make the latter
> receive the task's final state, i.e. failed, killed, or successful.
> I'm just posting this here to get a sense of whether this is a good idea. If
> people think it's okay, I will make a patch against trunk that implements
> these changes.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
