big-data/hadoop
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

YARN-10834. Intra-queue preemption: apps that don't use defined custom resource won't be preempted. Contributed by Eric Payne.

Browse Source 
(cherry picked from commit dc6f456e95)
This commit is contained in:
Jim Brennan 2021-06-28 14:52:19 +00:00
parent 75f8198aa8
commit 47b3939009
2 changed files with 86 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

5
hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/yarn/server/resourcemanager/monitor/capacity/FifoIntraQueuePreemptionPlugin.java
View File

@ -288,8 +288,9 @@ private TreeSet<TempAppPerPartition> calculateIdealAssignedResourcePerApp(
// Once unallocated resource is 0, we can stop assigning ideal per app.
if (Resources.lessThanOrEqual(rc, clusterResource,
queueReassignableResource, Resources.none()) || rc
.isAnyMajorResourceZeroOrNegative(queueReassignableResource)) {
queueReassignableResource, Resources.none()) ||
(rc.isAnyMajorResourceZeroOrNegative(queueReassignableResource)
&& context.getInQueuePreemptionConservativeDRF())) {
continue;
}

83
hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/yarn/server/resourcemanager/monitor/capacity/TestProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicyIntraQueueWithDRF.java
View File

@ -18,11 +18,14 @@
package org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.monitor.capacity;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.api.protocolrecords.ResourceTypes;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.api.records.Resource;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.api.records.ResourceInformation;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.monitor.capacity.mockframework.ProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicyMockFramework;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.scheduler.capacity.CapacitySchedulerConfiguration;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.scheduler.capacity.LeafQueue;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.util.resource.DominantResourceCalculator;
import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.util.resource.ResourceUtils;
import org.junit.Before;
import org.junit.Test;
@ -189,6 +192,86 @@ public void testIntraQueuePreemptionFairOrderingWithStrictAndRelaxedDRF()
getAppAttemptId(1))));
}
@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
@Test
public void testIntraQueuePreemptionFairOrdering3ResourcesWithStrictAndRelaxedDRF()
throws IOException {
/**
* Continue to allow intra-queue preemption when only one of the user's
* resources is above the user limit.
* Queue structure is:
*
* <pre>
* root
* / |
* a b
* </pre>
*
* Guaranteed resource of a and b are 30720:300 and 30720:300 Total cluster
* resource = 61440:600.
* Scenario: Queue B has one running app using 61720:60 resources with no
* pending resources, and one app with no used resources and 30720:30
* pending resources.
*
* The first part of the test is to show what happens when the conservative
* DRF property is set. Since the memory is above and the vcores is below
* the user limit, only the minimum number of containers is allowed.
* In the second part, since conservative DRF is relaxed, all containers
* needed are allowed to be preempted (minus the AM size).
*/
conf.set(CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.INTRAQUEUE_PREEMPTION_ORDER_POLICY,
"userlimit_first");
conf.set(CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.PREFIX
+ "root.b." + CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.ORDERING_POLICY, "fair");
conf.setBoolean(
CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.IN_QUEUE_PREEMPTION_CONSERVATIVE_DRF,
true);
String RESOURCE_1 = "res1";
riMap.put(RESOURCE_1, ResourceInformation
.newInstance(RESOURCE_1, "", 0, ResourceTypes.COUNTABLE, 0,
Integer.MAX_VALUE));
ResourceUtils.initializeResourcesFromResourceInformationMap(riMap);
String labelsConfig = "=61440:600,true;";
String nodesConfig = // n1 has no label
"n1= res=61440:600";
String queuesConfig =
// guaranteed,max,used,pending,reserved
"root(=[61440:600 61440:600 61440:600 30720:30 0]);" + // root
"-a(=[30720:300 61440:600 0:0 0:0 0]);" + // a
"-b(=[30720:300 61440:600 61440:60 30720:30 0]);"; // b
String appsConfig =
"b\t" + "(1,1024:1,n1,,60,false,0:0,user1);" + // app1 in b
"b\t" + "(1,0:0,n1,,0,false,30720:30,user3);"; // app2 in b
buildEnv(labelsConfig, nodesConfig, queuesConfig, appsConfig);
Resource ul = Resource.newInstance(30720, 300);
when(((LeafQueue)(cs.getQueue("root.b")))
.getResourceLimitForAllUsers(any(), any(), any(), any())
).thenReturn(ul);
policy.editSchedule();
verify(eventHandler, times(0)).handle(argThat(
new TestProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicy.IsPreemptionRequestFor(
getAppAttemptId(1))));
reset(eventHandler);
conf.setBoolean(
CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.IN_QUEUE_PREEMPTION_CONSERVATIVE_DRF,
false);
buildEnv(labelsConfig, nodesConfig, queuesConfig, appsConfig);
when(((LeafQueue)(cs.getQueue("root.b")))
.getResourceLimitForAllUsers(any(), any(), any(), any())
).thenReturn(ul);
policy.editSchedule();
verify(eventHandler, times(29)).handle(argThat(
new TestProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicy.IsPreemptionRequestFor(
getAppAttemptId(1))));
}
@Test
public void testIntraQueuePreemptionWithDominantVCoreResource()
throws IOException {