[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-5906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15766405#comment-15766405
]
Sunil G commented on YARN-5906:
-------------------------------
bq.Were you suggesting to move some implementations to an abstract base class
to share between other implementations, or were you suggesting to move some
private methods to the SchedulingPlacementSet interface?
I was more or less thinking to move few common methods to an abstract class.
bq.Not sure if I understand the question, different SchedulingPlacementSet
could have different ordering of preferred node. Could you elaborate?
{{LocalitySchedulingPlacementSet#getPreferredNodeIterator}} currently trying to
get singleNode from {{PlacementSetUtils.getSingleNode(clusterPlacementSet)}}
call. Going forward, if we need to have different policies to select nodes for
different allocations, i think we will be invoking {{getSingleNode}} or
{{getMultiNode}} etc. My doubt is, when we need to provide an interator of a
set of nodes which are arranged in some order (as per configuration policy),
this code may become more trickier. Could we do an interface model here, so
that different node ordering policies could be injected?
> Update AppSchedulingInfo to use SchedulingPlacementSet
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-5906
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-5906
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Wangda Tan
> Assignee: Wangda Tan
> Attachments: YARN-5906.1.patch, YARN-5906.2.patch, YARN-5906.3.patch,
> YARN-5906.4.patch
>
>
> Currently AppSchedulingInfo simply stores resource request and scheduler make
> decision according to stored resource request. For example, CS/FS use
> slightly different approach to get pending resource request and make delay
> scheduling decision.
> There're several benefits of moving pending resource request data structure
> to SchedulingPlacementSet
> 1) Delay scheduling logic should be agnostic to scheduler, for example CS
> supports count-based delay and FS supports both of count-based and time-based
> delay. Ideally scheduler should be able to choose which delay scheduling
> policy to use.
> 2) In addition to 1., YARN-4902 has proposal to support pluggable delay
> scheduling behavior in addition to locality-based (host->rack->offswitch).
> Which requires more flexibility.
> 3) To make YARN-4902 becomes real, instead of directly adding the new
> resource request API to client, we can make scheduler to use it internally to
> make sure it is well defined. And AppSchedulingInfo/SchedulingPlacementSet
> will be the perfect place to isolate which ResourceRequest implementation to
> use.
> 4) Different scheduling requirement needs different behavior of checking
> ResourceRequest table.
> This JIRA is the 1st patch of several refactorings. Which moves all
> ResourceRequest data structure and logics to SchedulingPlacementSet. We need
> follow changes to make it better structured
> - Make delay scheduling to be a plugin of SchedulingPlacementSet
> - After YARN-4902 get committed, change SchedulingPlacementSet to use
> YARN-4902 internally.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
