[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7153?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16207212#comment-16207212
]
Sihua Zhou commented on FLINK-7153:
-----------------------------------
I prefer [2], it also fix FLINK-7218 and do a better job than the current one.
But i also have a bit more thought.
1. For [2], after getting the prefer location list, we should count according
to location and sort according to the count result, eg. we should turn
{code:java}{location1, location2, location2}{code} into {code}{(location2, 2),
(location1, 1)}{code}, this means we like location2 more that location1.
2. For a bit more thought, scheduler should not only consider the input of the
source, but also consider the location of the state, and the schedule order
should determine by ExecuteJobVertex's weight not just according to creation
order.
> Eager Scheduling can't allocate source for ExecutionGraph correctly
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-7153
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7153
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JobManager
> Affects Versions: 1.3.1
> Reporter: Sihua Zhou
> Assignee: Stephan Ewen
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 1.4.0, 1.3.3
>
>
> The ExecutionGraph.scheduleEager() function allocate for ExecutionJobVertex
> one by one via calling ExecutionJobVertex.allocateResourcesForAll(), here is
> two problem about it:
> 1. The ExecutionVertex.getPreferredLocationsBasedOnInputs will always return
> empty, cause `sourceSlot` always be null until `ExectionVertex` has been
> deployed via 'Execution.deployToSlot()'. So allocate resource base on
> prefered location can't work correctly, we need to set the slot info for
> `Execution` as soon as Execution.allocateSlotForExecution() called
> successfully?
> 2. Current allocate strategy can't allocate the slot optimize. Here is the
> test case:
> {code}
> JobVertex v1 = new JobVertex("v1", jid1);
> JobVertex v2 = new JobVertex("v2", jid2);
> SlotSharingGroup group = new SlotSharingGroup();
> v1.setSlotSharingGroup(group);
> v2.setSlotSharingGroup(group);
> v1.setParallelism(2);
> v2.setParallelism(4);
> v1.setInvokableClass(BatchTask.class);
> v2.setInvokableClass(BatchTask.class);
> v2.connectNewDataSetAsInput(v1, DistributionPattern.POINTWISE,
> ResultPartitionType.PIPELINED_BOUNDED);
> {code}
> Currently, after allocate for v1,v2, we got a local partition and three
> remote partition. But actually, it should be 2 local partition and 2 remote
> partition.
> The causes of the above problems is becuase that the current allocate
> strategy is allocate the resource for execution one by one(if the execution
> can allocate from SlotGroup than get it, Otherwise ask for a new one for it).
> If we change the allocate strategy to two step will solve this problem, below
> is the Pseudo code:
> {code}
> for (ExecutionJobVertex ejv: getVerticesTopologically) {
> //step 1: try to allocate from SlothGroup base on inputs one by one (which
> only allocate resource base on location).
> //step 2: allocate for the remain execution.
> }
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
