TaoYang526 commented on code in PR #7855:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/7855#discussion_r2281067903
##########
hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/yarn/server/resourcemanager/scheduler/AbstractYarnScheduler.java:
##########
@@ -722,11 +722,10 @@ protected void
autoCorrectContainerAllocation(List<ResourceRequest> resourceRequ
if (allocatedContainers != null) {
for (RMContainer rmContainer : allocatedContainers) {
if (extraContainers > 0) {
- // Change the state of the container from ALLOCATED to EXPIRED
since it is not required.
+ // Change the state of the container from ALLOCATED to RELEASED
+ // since it is not required.
LOG.debug("Removing extra container:{}",
rmContainer.getContainer());
- completedContainer(rmContainer,
SchedulerUtils.createAbnormalContainerStatus(
- rmContainer.getContainerId(),
SchedulerUtils.EXPIRED_CONTAINER),
- RMContainerEventType.EXPIRE);
+ asyncContainerRelease(rmContainer);
Review Comment:
For the old one, "expired since it was unused" is not accurate because it
was released due to over-allocation, not because the waiting period expired.
For the new one, "Container released by application" has been used in different
scenarios that actively released by application, I think over-allocation could
be included in this scope. @shameersss1 could you please share your thoughts
about this?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
