[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15904773#comment-15904773
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


[~sunilg], sorry I had missed your comment.
I will update a small doc over the weekend.
The approach suggested above takes into account non exclusive label, move app, 
default label of queue, etc.
I will detail it in the document to clarify what is meant for what.

Yes, I agree we should brainstorm more and involve others to gain a consensus 
on the approach. Some other scenarios may also come out of it.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Sunil G (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15898807#comment-15898807
 ] 

Sunil G commented on YARN-6148:
---

I generally went through whole approach suggested here, and I still feel there 
are some more grey areas.

Could [~varun_saxena] or [~naganarasimha...@apache.org] to put these in a small 
doc here. I feel this may be needed because there are small feature sets from 
node label / scheduler is playing impact on MR's blacklisting. Few of them are 
discussed here, but still its better to brainstorm. To summarize some features 
which has impact on blacklist are non-exclusive label, move app, default 
queue's label, preemption of non-exclusive label etc.
In hindsight, I feel MR is going to get multiple data sets. Like 
per-label-node-count, node-report-on-label-change, app-queue-on-change, 
app-default-label-on-change etc in addition to existing MR blacklist. Its 
better to get a common consensus here on approach. I thought of looping 
[~jlowe] and [~leftnoteasy] as changes are proposed in MR and in YARN's 
interface end. 


> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Naganarasimha G R (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15897404#comment-15897404
 ] 

Naganarasimha G R commented on YARN-6148:
-

bq. When default label for an application changes which will typically happen 
when application moves across queues, we will consider only the blacklisting 
failures on target queue's default label to ignore blacklisting.
The reason we need to consider {{"target queue's default label"}} for the 
*threshold* is because we have *threshold* to ensure that we do not hang the 
app by blacklisting all the nodes for this app, so once we have moved to the 
new queue then if the container fails then the new request gets submitted to 
the target queue's default label . so we need to consider the threshold for the 
target queue's label only and we can ignore blacklist for the previous label, 
Thoughts?

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15897155#comment-15897155
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


Me and Naga just had an offline discussion with [~sunilg]. Will update the 
summary.

# We will report a default applicable label for application (if none is 
specified) which can either be the label in Application Submission context or 
queue default label, in both Register AM response and in Allocate Response. 
Latter because application can move across queues.
# When the label for a node changes, we will also report this node as part of 
updated nodes report in Allocate Response.
# We would also update Container Info in allocated containers list to include 
information such as label info including whether its a non exclusive label and 
the type of container i.e. guaranteed or opportunistic.
# At a high level, MR AM will maintain a list of node to label information so 
as to ascertain which label should the node blacklist be accounted for. 
Implementation wise, this can probably be done by updating the assigned 
requests.
# When default label for an application changes which will typically happen 
when application moves across queues, we will consider only the blacklisting 
failures on target queue's default label to ignore blacklisting. If application 
moves back and forth across queues, say y => x => y, we can reconstruct the 
applicable  node count for blacklisting as we have both the blacklisted nodes 
and their mapping to a label. 

Thoughts?

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15896978#comment-15896978
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


Offline. we (me, [~Naganarasimha] and [~bibinchundatt]) had discussed some more 
scenarios which need to be handled.
So following is the plan regarding what will be done.

# We will send a label to node count map containing label to active NM count 
mapping for requested labels.
# If labels are disabled, we will report cluster count as earlier and not send 
anything in label to active NM count mapping. AM can consider only the cluster 
node count reported earlier in such cases. This will also help us in handling 
the case for rolling downgrades.
# Non Exclusive labels will not be reported in the label to node count unless 
explicitly requested by AM.
# Mapreduce AM would consider both map and reduce label expression separately, 
if they are different, while deciding on ignoring AM blacklisting. We will 
check label to node count mapping to determine the applicable node counts for 
both map and reduce. 
# Queue can have a default label too. This needs to be reported to AM as well. 
Also needs to be reported on move. Can be handled in YARN-6209. Active NM count 
may depend on it and AM currently does not know anything about default label of 
queue.
#  Container info sent while reporting allocated containers would also contain 
label on which container was allocated on. Based on this info we will determine 
if the node assigned is a default label of queue, map/reduce partition or non 
exclusive label. We will not count non exclusive label towards ignoring 
blacklisting. 

Thoughts?

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Sunil G (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15867298#comment-15867298
 ] 

Sunil G commented on YARN-6148:
---

+1 for the current approach.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15867294#comment-15867294
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


Yes, that's the plan. 

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Rohith Sharma K S (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15867139#comment-15867139
 ] 

Rohith Sharma K S commented on YARN-6148:
-

Basically in this JIRA lets do for YARN related changes such as adding new API 
of node count per partition. AM need to use this API in case of partitioned 
cluster. MR related changes need to be handled separately in MapReduce project.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15866481#comment-15866481
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


bq. IIUC we don't track label of nodes in AM side of MR
We get map and reduce labels from MR configurations 
mapreduce.map.node-label-expression and mapreduce.reduce.node-label-expression 
respectively if this is what you were asking.
For using the count per label, a sibling Mapreduce JIRA will have to be opened. 
Will do so after making some progress on this JIRA.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Wangda Tan (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15866479#comment-15866479
 ] 

Wangda Tan commented on YARN-6148:
--

[~varun_saxena], I think we should add the new field to branch-2 if required. 
Since it is a compatible change, I think we're good now.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15866475#comment-15866475
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


[~leftnoteasy], only concern was whether we add a new field in AllocateResponse 
for branch-2 or not. In principle we are fine with sending count per partition.
But as we specify only one partition per job, the patch sufficed our use case. 
So we thought make a simple fix in as of now and get this in quickly as other 
proposed fix may take some time.

However, as we have nothing against sending node count per label and most of 
the guys here are ok with adding a new field so lets go with that.
I will make the necessary change and update.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Wangda Tan (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15866440#comment-15866440
 ] 

Wangda Tan commented on YARN-6148:
--

[~Naganarasimha], [~varun_saxena], [~rohithsharma],

Discussed with [~sunilg] about this, I think it might be better to add a new 
field to AllocateResponse which return per-partition #node, which will include 
all partitions with #nodes > 0. Please let me know if you have any concerns of 
this. (Didn't read all comments in the JIRA, apologize if it is already 
discussed). 

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Bibin A Chundatt (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15866432#comment-15866432
 ] 

Bibin A Chundatt commented on YARN-6148:


[~sunilg]/[~varun_saxena]
{quote}
we must send per label node count to MR (only for request partitions). 
<, > It can be a new parameter in the existing 
protocol. Also MR code to be changed as per this.
{quote}
IIUC we don't track label of nodes in AM side of MR so even if we send  node 
count per label will be able to disable blacklisting for partitioned nodes.??



> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15865986#comment-15865986
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


I fully understand the use case you are pointing out. Yes, the flaws with 
respect to headroom won't be as problematic as it would be with blacklisting in 
the scenario pointed above. 
If extra headroom is reported, it will just lead to more reducers being ramped 
up(as AM will think there are enough resources for map tasks) which may impact 
assigning of resources to maps. But post MAPREDUCE-6302 this wont lead to 
forever hanging of jobs. If we send headroom for each label separately we may 
be able to ramp up/down reducers more effectively. However, headroom is used at 
multiple places and there would be other areas to look at.

In principle I am fine with sending node count per label. This isn't 
necessarily a use case for us as of now but in general there are use cases as 
pointed out in discussion above as well, so we can handle it this way if there 
is a general agreement with adding a new field in Allocate Response.
I will wait for feedback from Wangda on this and then we can proceed.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Rohith Sharma K S (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15865181#comment-15865181
 ] 

Rohith Sharma K S commented on YARN-6148:
-

IIUC, headroom is relax feature and blacklisting is strict feature which are 
totally in opposite direction. If more head room is sent to AM, then it is fine 
because there is no impact for AM's. Basically AMs can send more resource 
request to YARN.
But in case of blacklisting, node count affects the AM directly and leads to 
hang forever if node count is not proper. It is bigger issue than headroom.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15865157#comment-15865157
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


Agree...
As I said above, I am not against whatever Sunil suggested. Maybe make the fix 
I have done here for branch-2 (i.e. ,make it consistent with the way headroom 
is currently sent) and send node count per label for trunk. Also as pointed out 
earlier, we need to make this change for headroom too then. Some flaws can be 
pointed out in the way we send headroom calculation as of today as well.

However, if we do make this change, what do we do with the old headroom and 
node count fields. Keep them for backward compatibility? Or deprecate them or 
remove them? But latter will be disruptive for current AMs'. 
So some further discussion will be required for this proposed change. And I 
think we can target that for trunk only. Thoughts?
By the way, for 3.0.0 can we break compatibility across alpha releases?

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Naganarasimha G R (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15865050#comment-15865050
 ] 

Naganarasimha G R commented on YARN-6148:
-

Thanks [~rohithsharma] for your thoughts,
Agree that it will solve the issue completely but we were targeting this 
modification for 2.8, hence we kept it simple. we are not against fixing in 
that way but only thing is where should the modifications land to ? I think 
similar issue exists with Headroom too. In case of slow start there are 
probabilities that headroom gets violated if more headroom is sent. 
Also would like to know [~wangda]'s opinion on this !

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Rohith Sharma K S (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15865008#comment-15865008
 ] 

Rohith Sharma K S commented on YARN-6148:
-

Sorry to pitch in late, went through the discussion above.  I think we should 
consider per partition node count strictly rather than assuming the application 
is running with one/two partition. 

In case of blacklisting scenario, application would hang if application is 
running with multiple partition. Lets say, application is running with   If all nodes of labelB blacklisted by application, 
then purging will not happen at any cost. This leads to application hang 
forever.  YARN has to send per partition node count and also AM should handle 
per partition count blacklisting. Then the whole problem is solved.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15864967#comment-15864967
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


By the way I need to make a check for node labels enabled in the patch.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15864966#comment-15864966
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


Or probably this improvement can be done as part of YARN-4902

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15864277#comment-15864277
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


[~sunilg] I do see your point here. But as Naga mentioned our intention was to 
make behavior similar to that of headroom. Even in the case of headroom, we 
consider AM partition.
I am slightly worried about backward compatibility though. I doubt any AM would 
be expecting all the nodes even in a partitioned cluster though.
Thoughts?

Enhancing the API i.e. sending node count per label or say even headroom per 
label can be done as an improvement in another JIRA if there is a use case?

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Sunil G (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15863971#comment-15863971
 ] 

Sunil G commented on YARN-6148:
---

Yes. I also thought in the same line. However this may cause issues later in 
cases what we discussed earlier. And this is to be exposed to external 
applications as well. So I am not so sure with a linear approach here.

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Naganarasimha G R (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15863942#comment-15863942
 ] 

Naganarasimha G R commented on YARN-6148:
-

[~sunilg],
Yes you are right, its similar to calculating the headroom (YARN-3215) when 
partitions are specified , but we avoided to modify the API based on [~wangda] 
's 
[comment|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3215?focusedCommentId=15074330=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15074330]
 . So offline me and [~varun_saxena] thought it would be better to have similar 
logic for total cluster size too. 
Also mostly use case what we have currently is that whole job is run with a 
single partition. 

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Sunil G (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15863347#comment-15863347
 ] 

Sunil G commented on YARN-6148:
---

[~varun_saxena]

I have some doubts over here. 
{{allocateResponse.setNumClusterNodes(allocation.getApplicableNMCount());}}

Still we sent one integer value of node count to AM. This count is better than 
earlier because its the node count for all used partitions for this app 
(instead of all nodes in cluster). But I am wary about few use cases.

Lets consider  below scenario for MR:
- AM container is running in LabelA(it has 10 nodes)
- Maps and reducers are running in LabelB (10 nodes)

4 tasks are failed in one node of LabelB. Now that node ll be blacklisted. 
As per your code, node count is 20 (Am container's LabelA, Map/Reducer 
containers LabelB). But for task failure, we need not have to worry about 
LabelA (AM container node label). We should consider only LabelB here.

So I think we must send per label node count to MR (only for request 
partitions). {{<, >}} It can be a new parameter in the 
existing protocol. Also MR code to be changed as per this. This may be more 
complete.


> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15861842#comment-15861842
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


Checkstyle cant be fixed and test failure is unrelated. Passes locally

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
> Attachments: YARN-6148.01.patch
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Hadoop QA (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15861614#comment-15861614
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on YARN-6148:
-

| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue}  0m 
18s{color} | {color:blue} Docker mode activated. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} @author {color} | {color:green}  0m  
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} test4tests {color} | {color:green}  0m 
 0s{color} | {color:green} The patch appears to include 1 new or modified test 
files. {color} |
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} mvndep {color} | {color:blue}  0m  
9s{color} | {color:blue} Maven dependency ordering for branch {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 20m 
47s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  8m 
56s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green}  0m 
45s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvnsite {color} | {color:green}  1m  
9s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvneclipse {color} | {color:green}  0m 
37s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  2m 
10s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 
49s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} mvndep {color} | {color:blue}  0m 
10s{color} | {color:blue} Maven dependency ordering for patch {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green}  0m 
54s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  6m 
56s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green}  6m 
56s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:orange}-0{color} | {color:orange} checkstyle {color} | {color:orange}  
0m 45s{color} | {color:orange} hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn: The patch 
generated 1 new + 138 unchanged - 1 fixed = 139 total (was 139) {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvnsite {color} | {color:green}  1m  
9s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvneclipse {color} | {color:green}  0m 
34s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} whitespace {color} | {color:green}  0m 
 0s{color} | {color:green} The patch has no whitespace issues. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  2m 
51s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 
51s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} unit {color} | {color:green}  0m 
33s{color} | {color:green} hadoop-yarn-api in the patch passed. {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} unit {color} | {color:red} 40m 43s{color} 
| {color:red} hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager in the patch failed. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} asflicense {color} | {color:green}  0m 
29s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not generate ASF License warnings. 
{color} |
| {color:black}{color} | {color:black} {color} | {color:black} 99m 56s{color} | 
{color:black} {color} |
\\
\\
|| Reason || Tests ||
| Failed junit tests | 
hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.scheduler.fair.TestFSAppStarvation |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Docker |  Image:yetus/hadoop:a9ad5d6 |
| JIRA Issue | YARN-6148 |
| JIRA Patch URL | 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12852072/YARN-6148.01.patch |
| Optional Tests |  asflicense  compile  javac  javadoc  mvninstall  mvnsite  
unit  findbugs  checkstyle  |
| uname | Linux 800bdb081862 3.13.0-103-generic #150-Ubuntu SMP Thu Nov 24 
10:34:17 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Build tool | maven |
| Personality | /testptch/hadoop/patchprocess/precommit/personality/provided.sh 
|
| git revision | trunk / 3a0a0a4 |
| Default Java | 1.8.0_121 |
| findbugs | v3.0.0 |
| checkstyle | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-YARN-Build/14882/artifact/patchprocess/diff-checkstyle-hadoop-yarn-project_hadoop-yarn.txt
 |
| unit | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-YARN-Build/14882/artifact/patchprocess/patch-unit-hadoop-yarn-project_hadoop-yarn_hadoop-yarn-server_hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager.txt
 |
|  Test Results | 

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Hadoop QA (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15861554#comment-15861554
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on YARN-6148:
-

| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue}  0m 
19s{color} | {color:blue} Docker mode activated. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} @author {color} | {color:green}  0m  
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} test4tests {color} | {color:green}  0m 
 0s{color} | {color:green} The patch appears to include 1 new or modified test 
files. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 15m 
21s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  0m 
41s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green}  0m 
27s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvnsite {color} | {color:green}  0m 
46s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvneclipse {color} | {color:green}  0m 
19s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  1m 
21s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 
25s{color} | {color:green} trunk passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green}  0m 
41s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  0m 
39s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green}  0m 
39s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:orange}-0{color} | {color:orange} checkstyle {color} | {color:orange}  
0m 25s{color} | {color:orange} 
hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager:
 The patch generated 1 new + 127 unchanged - 1 fixed = 128 total (was 128) 
{color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvnsite {color} | {color:green}  0m 
39s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvneclipse {color} | {color:green}  0m 
15s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} whitespace {color} | {color:green}  0m 
 0s{color} | {color:green} The patch has no whitespace issues. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  1m 
28s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 
22s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} unit {color} | {color:red} 43m  1s{color} 
| {color:red} hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager in the patch failed. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} asflicense {color} | {color:green}  0m 
18s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not generate ASF License warnings. 
{color} |
| {color:black}{color} | {color:black} {color} | {color:black} 68m 58s{color} | 
{color:black} {color} |
\\
\\
|| Reason || Tests ||
| Failed junit tests | 
hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.scheduler.fair.TestFSAppStarvation |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Docker |  Image:yetus/hadoop:a9ad5d6 |
| JIRA Issue | YARN-6148 |
| JIRA Patch URL | 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12852070/YARN-6148.01.patch |
| Optional Tests |  asflicense  compile  javac  javadoc  mvninstall  mvnsite  
unit  findbugs  checkstyle  |
| uname | Linux 639ed3288870 3.13.0-105-generic #152-Ubuntu SMP Fri Dec 2 
15:37:11 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Build tool | maven |
| Personality | /testptch/hadoop/patchprocess/precommit/personality/provided.sh 
|
| git revision | trunk / 3a0a0a4 |
| Default Java | 1.8.0_121 |
| findbugs | v3.0.0 |
| checkstyle | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-YARN-Build/14881/artifact/patchprocess/diff-checkstyle-hadoop-yarn-project_hadoop-yarn_hadoop-yarn-server_hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager.txt
 |
| unit | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-YARN-Build/14881/artifact/patchprocess/patch-unit-hadoop-yarn-project_hadoop-yarn_hadoop-yarn-server_hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager.txt
 |
|  Test Results | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-YARN-Build/14881/testReport/ |
| modules | C: 
hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager
 U: 
hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager
 |
| Console output | 

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Varun Saxena (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15855816#comment-15855816
 ] 

Varun Saxena commented on YARN-6148:


Yes the intention is to make behavior consistent. The nodes available to the 
application depends on the partitions requested by it (if they are accessible 
from the queue application has been submitted to) so number of nodes reported 
should also honor that. 
Moreover, NM node count is used by MapReduce AM for instance, to ignore 
blacklisting. It should use the node count based on requested partitions. 
Because, it is possible that blacklisting will never be ignored if total number 
of nodes in the requested partitions(in terms of %) are less than configured % 
to ignore blacklisting. We can still give a different config value per 
application but it will be better to use node count based on requested 
partitions to determine when blacklisting has to be ignored. 

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Naganarasimha G R (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15854629#comment-15854629
 ] 

Naganarasimha G R commented on YARN-6148:
-

Currently we are giving the Headroom based on the partitions requested by the 
application. Similarly total nodes in the cluster also needs to be given based 
on the the partitions being queried. This will ensure that the behavior is in 
sync with other features for the partition label.
IIUC [~varun_saxena] is trying to mention this to avoid blacklisting all the 
partition nodes for the app if we consider the total cluster nodes, and 
generally partition nodes are subset of it.
cc [~wangda]

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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

[jira] [Commented] (YARN-6148) NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested node label partitions.

[Bibin A Chundatt (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15854222#comment-15854222
 ] 

Bibin A Chundatt commented on YARN-6148:


[~varun_saxena] could you please share background and details 

> NM node count reported to AM in Allocate Response should consider requested 
> node label partitions.
> --
>
> Key: YARN-6148
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6148
> Project: Hadoop YARN
>  Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Varun Saxena
>Assignee: Varun Saxena
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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