[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6940?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16227519#comment-16227519
]
Haibo Chen edited comment on YARN-6940 at 10/31/17 8:48 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------
[~asuresh] A quick question. If we only do node-local container update (we
reject container allocations on a different node than the original node), what
is the reason to set relaxLocality to true in the first place?
was (Author: haibochen):
[~asuresh] A quick question. If we only do node-local container update (we
reject container allocations on a different node than the original node), what
is the reason to set relaxLocality to true in the first case?
> FairScheduler: Enable Container update CodePaths and container resize testcase
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-6940
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6940
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: fairscheduler
> Reporter: Arun Suresh
> Assignee: Arun Suresh
> Attachments: YARN-6940.001.patch
>
>
> After YARN-6216, the Container Update (which includes Resource increase and
> decrease) code-paths are mostly scheduler agnostic.
> This JIRA tracks the final minor change needed in the FairScheduler. It also
> re-enables the {{TestAMRMClient#testAMRMClientWithContainerResourceChange}}
> test for the FairScheduler - which verifies that it works for the
> FairScheduler.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
