[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3391?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14484815#comment-14484815
]
Zhijie Shen commented on YARN-3391:
-----------------------------------
I created a new patch:
bq. So in general, I think we should use as much javadoc comments instead of
inline comments for public APIs.
Move the comments into TimelineUtils and make them javadoc.
bq. We should add more info to LOG.warn messages, at least to tell user flow
run should be numeric.
Improve the warn message
bq. In addition, do we need to check negative value for flow run here?
According to Sangjin's given example, we usually want to identify a flow run by
timestamp, which theoretically can be negative to represent sometime before
1970.
> Clearly define flow ID/ flow run / flow version in API and storage
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-3391
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3391
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: timelineserver
> Reporter: Zhijie Shen
> Assignee: Zhijie Shen
> Attachments: YARN-3391.1.patch, YARN-3391.2.patch, YARN-3391.3.patch,
> YARN-3391.4.patch
>
>
> To continue the discussion in YARN-3040, let's figure out the best way to
> describe the flow.
> Some key issues that we need to conclude on:
> - How do we include the flow version in the context so that it gets passed
> into the collector and to the storage eventually?
> - Flow run id should be a number as opposed to a generic string?
> - Default behavior for the flow run id if it is missing (i.e. client did not
> set it)
> - How do we handle flow attributes in case of nested levels of flows?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
