[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15093466#comment-15093466
]
Naganarasimha G R commented on YARN-4557:
-----------------------------------------
Thanks for the comments [~wangda],
but few concerns here :
{code}
if (anyRequest.getNodeLabelExpression()
.equals(RMNodeLabelsManager.NO_LABEL)) {
missedNonPartitionedRequestSchedulingOpportunity =
application
.addMissedNonPartitionedRequestSchedulingOpportunity(priority);
}
{code}
# why in the above code application we are storing the missed Missed
NonPartitioned Request Scheduling Opportunity for each priority then ? should
it not be per app ?
# As per existing logic Priority inversion happens during following scenarios
too
* Locality doesn't get matched for the given priority
* Node Labels are different for the different priority and may be resource
availability for these labels are also different.
Thoughts?
> Few issues in scheduling with Node Labels
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-4557
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4557
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: resourcemanager
> Reporter: Naganarasimha G R
> Assignee: Naganarasimha G R
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: YARN-4557.v1.001.patch, YARN-4557.v2.001.patch,
> YARN-4557.v2.002.patch
>
>
> * When app has submitted requests for multiple priority in default partition,
> then if one of the priority requests has missed
> non-partitioned-resource-request equivalent to cluster size then container
> needs to be allocated. Currently if the higher priority requests doesn't
> satisfy the condition, then whole application is getting skipped instead the
> priority
> * When queue has * as accessibility, then the queue ordering was not
> happening properly.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
