[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-4348?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15533113#comment-15533113 ]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-4348: --------------------------------------- GitHub user mxm opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2571 [FLINK-4348] Simplify logic of SlotManager This pull request is split up into two commits: 1. It removes some code from the `SlotManager` to make it simpler. - It makes use of `handleSlotRequestFailedAtTaskManager` and simplifies it because we can assume that a Slot is only registered once if we talk to the same instance of a TaskExecutor. Further, we can omit to check the free slots because we previously removed the slot from the free slots. - `updateSlotStatus` only deals with new Task slots. All other updates are performed by the `ResourceManager`. In case the ResourceManager creashes, it will re-register all slot statuses. 2. It fences `TaskExecutor` messages using an `InstanceID` which is required to make 1 work correctly. New messages have been introduced to achieve that. You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/mxm/flink flip-6 Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2571.patch To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch with (at least) the following in the commit message: This closes #2571 ---- commit 1d297403e5e085d944d80b498c4a269a794f8e2f Author: Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> Date: 2016-09-29T13:08:32Z [FLINK-4347] change assumptions in SlotManager allocation - Makes use of `handleSlotRequestFailedAtTaskManager` and simplifies it because we can assume that a Slot is only registered once if we talk to the same instance of a TaskExecutor. Further, we can omit to check the free slots because we previously removed the slot from the free slots. - `updateSlotStatus` only deals with new Task slots. All other updates are performed by the `ResourceManager`. In case the ResourceManager creashes, it will re-register all slot statuses. commit c6768524c869ecdb84f0a8ae48837afc329c9714 Author: Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> Date: 2016-09-29T14:03:39Z [FLINK-4348] discard message from old TaskExecutorGateways This fences old message using the InstanceID of the TaskExecutor. ---- > Implement slot allocation protocol with TaskExecutor > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Key: FLINK-4348 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-4348 > Project: Flink > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: Cluster Management > Reporter: Kurt Young > Assignee: Maximilian Michels > > When slotManager finds a proper slot in the free pool for a slot request, > slotManager marks the slot as occupied, then tells the taskExecutor to give > the slot to the specified JobMaster. > when a slot request is sent to taskExecutor, it should contain following > parameters: AllocationID, JobID, slotID, resourceManagerLeaderSessionID. > There exists 3 following possibilities of the response from taskExecutor, we > will discuss when each possibility happens and how to handle. > 1. Ack request which means the taskExecutor gives the slot to the specified > jobMaster as expected. > 2. Decline request if the slot is already occupied by other AllocationID. > 3. Timeout which could caused by lost of request message or response message > or slow network transfer. > On the first occasion, ResourceManager need to do nothing. However, under the > second and third occasion, ResourceManager need to notify slotManager, > slotManager will verify and clear all the previous allocate information for > this slot request firstly, then try to find a proper slot for the slot > request again. This may cause some duplicate allocation, e.g. the slot > request to TaskManager is successful but the response is lost somehow, so we > may request a slot in another TaskManager, this causes two slots assigned to > one request, but it can be taken care of by rejecting registration at > JobMaster. > There are still some question need to discuss in a step further. > 1. Who send slotRequest to taskExecutor, SlotManager or ResourceManager? I > think it's better that SlotManager delegates the rpc call to ResourceManager > when SlotManager need to communicate with outside world. ResourceManager > know which taskExecutor to send the request based on ResourceID. Besides this > RPC call which used to request slot to taskExecutor should not be a > RpcMethod, because we hope only SlotManager has permission to call the > method, but the other component, for example JobMaster and TaskExecutor, > cannot call this method directly. > 2. If JobMaster reject the slot offer from a TaskExecutor, the TaskExecutor > should notify the free slot to ResourceManager immediately, or wait for next > heartbeat sync. The advantage of first way is the resourceManager’s view > could be updated faster. The advantage of second way is save a RPC method in > ResourceManager. > 3. There are two communication type. First, the slot request could be sent as > an ask operation where the response is returned as a future. Second, > resourceManager send the slot request in fire and forget way, the response > could be returned by an RPC call. I prefer the first one because it is more > simple and could save a RPC method in ResourceManager (for callback in the > second way). -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)