[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4390?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15272503#comment-15272503 ]
Eric Payne commented on YARN-4390: ---------------------------------- Sorry, [~leftnoteasy], for the delay. +1. LGTM (+) > Do surgical preemption based on reserved container in CapacityScheduler > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: YARN-4390 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4390 > Project: Hadoop YARN > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: capacity scheduler > Affects Versions: 3.0.0, 2.8.0, 2.7.3 > Reporter: Eric Payne > Assignee: Wangda Tan > Attachments: QueueNotHittingMax.jpg, YARN-4390-design.1.pdf, > YARN-4390-test-results.pdf, YARN-4390.1.patch, YARN-4390.2.patch, > YARN-4390.3.branch-2.patch, YARN-4390.3.patch, YARN-4390.4.patch, > YARN-4390.5.patch, YARN-4390.6.patch, YARN-4390.7.patch, YARN-4390.8.patch > > > There are multiple reasons why preemption could unnecessarily preempt > containers. One is that an app could be requesting a large container (say > 8-GB), and the preemption monitor could conceivably preempt multiple > containers (say 8, 1-GB containers) in order to fill the large container > request. These smaller containers would then be rejected by the requesting AM > and potentially given right back to the preempted app. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org