[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2001?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13993245#comment-13993245 ]
Wangda Tan commented on YARN-2001: ---------------------------------- +1 for [~jianhe], I think lots of application relies on comparison of container-id with int value only, we shouldn't change this behavior. To [~ozawa], bq. +1, if possible. Can we add epoch (cluster timestamp) to ResourceTrackerService's state via heartbeat? Could you elaborate on this, how can it solve container id clash problem? > Threshold for RM to accept requests from AM after failover > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: YARN-2001 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-2001 > Project: Hadoop YARN > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: resourcemanager > Reporter: Jian He > Assignee: Jian He > > After failover, RM may require a certain threshold to determine whether it’s > safe to make scheduling decisions and start accepting new container requests > from AMs. The threshold could be a certain amount of nodes. i.e. RM waits > until a certain amount of nodes joining before accepting new container > requests. Or it could simply be a timeout, only after the timeout RM accepts > new requests. > NMs joined after the threshold can be treated as new NMs and instructed to > kill all its containers. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.2#6252)