[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2113?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15985172#comment-15985172
 ] 

Sunil G commented on YARN-2113:
-------------------------------

[~eepayne]

In this example, if *used* resources for {{user1}} is under queue limit, UL 
will be same as queue capacity (Given we have one user). As per new check, if 
{{USERLIMIT_FIRST}} is configured, we will not preempt containers if usage is 
coming under user limit. Hence there were no preemption.
But if demand is within this user itself (based on priority), we have to 
preempt. I think i need to revisit the new logic added to consider local 
demand. I ll get back.

> Add cross-user preemption within CapacityScheduler's leaf-queue
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-2113
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2113
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: scheduler
>            Reporter: Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
>            Assignee: Sunil G
>         Attachments: IntraQueue Preemption-Impact Analysis.pdf, 
> TestNoIntraQueuePreemptionIfBelowUserLimitAndDifferentPrioritiesWithExtraUsers.txt,
>  YARN-2113.0001.patch, YARN-2113.0002.patch, YARN-2113.0003.patch, 
> YARN-2113.0004.patch, YARN-2113.0005.patch, YARN-2113.0006.patch, 
> YARN-2113.0007.patch, YARN-2113.0008.patch, YARN-2113.0009.patch, 
> YARN-2113.0010.patch, YARN-2113.0011.patch, YARN-2113.v0.patch
>
>
> Preemption today only works across queues and moves around resources across 
> queues per demand and usage. We should also have user-level preemption within 
> a queue, to balance capacity across users in a predictable manner.



--
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

Reply via email to