Hi Alexis,
Thanks for sharing more thoughts about resource configuration. Your
suggestions make a lot of sense to me.
I believe it could also help others especially for those who are more
familiar with K8s and tend to use pod template
as far as possible.
I have created a ticket for this
Hi Yang,
I understand the issue, and yes, if Flink memory must be specified in the
configuration anyway, it’s probably better to leave memory configuration in the
templates empty.
For the CPU case I still think the template’s requests/limits should have
priority if they are specified. The
Hi Alexis
Thanks for your valuable inputs.
First, I want to share why Flink has to overwrite the resources which are
defined in the pod template. You could the fields that will be
overwritten by Flink here[1]. I think the major reason is that Flink need
to ensure the consistency between Flink
Just to provide my opinion, I find the idea of factors unintuitive for this
specific case. When I’m working with Kubernetes resources and sizing, I have to
think in absolute terms for all pods and define requests and limits with
concrete values. Using factors for Flink means that I have to
Hi Yang,
I agree with you, but I think the limit-factor should be greater than or equal
to 1, and default to 1 is a better choice.
If the default value is 1.5, the memory limit will exceed the actual physical
memory of a node, which may result in OOM, machine downtime, or random pod
death if
Given that the limit-factor should be greater than 1, then using the
limit-factor could also work for memory.
> Why do we need a larger memory resource limit than request?
A typical use case I could imagine is the page cache. Having more page
cache might improve the performance.
And they could be
Yes, shrinking the requested memory will result in OOM. We do this because the
user-created job provides an initial value (for example, 2 cpus and 4096MB of
memory for TaskManager). In most cases, the user will not change this value
unless the task fails or there is an exception such as data
Hi Lz,
Thanks for sharing your ideas.
I have to admin that I prefer the limit factor to set the resource limit,
not the percentage to set the resource request.
Because usually the resource request is configured or calculated by Flink,
and it indicates user required resources.
It has the same
Hi,everyone
I have some other ideas for kubernetes resource Settings, as described by
WangYang in [flink-15648], which increase the CPU limit by a certain percentage
to provide more computational performance for jobs. Should we consider the
alternative of shrinking the request to start more
Hi,everyoneI have some other ideas for kubernetes resource Settings, as described by WangYang in [flink-15648], which increase the CPU limit by a certain percentage to provide more computational performance for jobs. Should we
Hi Yang,
I have limited Flink internals knowledge, but I can try to implement
FLINK-15648 and open up a PR on GitHub or send the patch via email. How does
that sound?
I'll sign the ICLA and switch to my personal address.
Sincerely,
Denis
On Wed, 2021-09-01 at 13:48 +0800, Yang Wang wrote:
Great. If no one wants to work on this ticket FLINK-15648, I will try to
get this done in the next major release cycle(1.15).
Best,
Yang
Denis Cosmin NUTIU 于2021年8月31日周二 下午4:59写道：
> Hi everyone,
>
> Thanks for getting back to me!
>
> > I think it would be nice if the task manager pods get
Hi everyone,
Thanks for getting back to me!
> I think it would be nice if the task manager pods get their values from the
> configuration file only if the pod templates don’t specify any resources.
> That was the goal of supporting pod templates, right? Allowing more custom
> scenarios
Hi all,
I think it is a good improvement to support different resource requests and
limits. And it is very useful
especially for the CPU resource since it heavily depends on the upstream
workloads.
Actually, we(alibaba) have introduced some internal config options to
support this feature. WDYT?
I think it would be nice if the task manager pods get their values from the
configuration file only if the pod templates don’t specify any resources. That
was the goal of supporting pod templates, right? Allowing more custom scenarios
without letting the configuration options get bloated.
Hi Matthias,
Thanks for getting back to me and for your time!
We have some Flink jobs deployed on Kubernetes and running kubectl top pod
gives the following result:
NAMECPU(cores)
MEMORY(bytes)
aa-78c8cb77d4-zlmpg
Hi Denis,
I did a bit of digging: It looks like there is no way to specify them
independently. You can find documentation about pod templates for
TaskManager and JobManager [1]. But even there it states that for cpu and
memory, the resource specs are overwritten by the Flink configuration. The
17 matches
Mail list logo
