[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-9879?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17015404#comment-17015404
]
Wangda Tan commented on YARN-9879:
----------------------------------
[~snemeth], most of the explanation looks reasonable to me. Regarding how to
prevent breaking existing CS queue contract. Instead of adding a flag to each
queue, I suggest to have a global config in CS about allow duplicated leaf
queue name or not.
Why I'm opposed to add the flag to each queue?
To me, use a queue name, or queue path is an intuitive choice of a user (not
admin). If the queue name had duplicates, it should fail and give you the right
reason.
If everybody think we should not implicitly change the CS behavior to allow
duplicate-named leaf queues, a top-level CS config should be sufficient (like
..<cs-prefix>.duplicated-queue-names.allowed), and clearly document it may
cause existing app failures. This won't add any burden for user to understand,
and it is also relatively easy for admin to understand. Anything config added
to the queue hierarchy seems a bit tricky.
> Allow multiple leaf queues with the same name in CS
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-9879
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-9879
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Gergely Pollak
> Assignee: Gergely Pollak
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: DesignDoc_v1.pdf
>
>
> Currently the leaf queue's name must be unique regardless of its position in
> the queue hierarchy.
> Design doc and first proposal is being made, I'll attach it as soon as it's
> done.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
