You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to yarn-issues@hadoop.apache.org by "Naganarasimha G R (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2018/05/07 00:35:00 UTC
[jira] [Comment Edited] (YARN-7892) Revisit NodeAttribute class
structure
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7892?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16465323#comment-16465323 ]
Naganarasimha G R edited comment on YARN-7892 at 5/7/18 12:34 AM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~sunilg],
{quote}NodeAttributeIDProto could be renamed to NodeAttributeKeyProto
{quote}
IMHO , I would suggest to go ahead with ID itself as it stands for identifier and had modelled it similar to ATS API {{TimelineEntity.Identifier}} . We are using this as part of our API hence named it as NodeAttributeID. I think if required we can rename it to AttributeIdentifierProto but {{Key}} does not seem to imply that it identifies the Attribute uniquely.
{quote}Map<String, String> to be changed an object which could be returned to user. This will make apis more cleaner and easier to maintain
{quote}
As discussed offline will make the modifications to proto objects returned for the user facing api's and will keep the {{NodeAttributeManager}} API as is.
was (Author: naganarasimha):
Hi [~sunilg],
{quote}NodeAttributeIDProto could be renamed to NodeAttributeKeyProto
{quote}
IMHO , I would suggest to go ahead with ID itself as it stands for identifier and had modelled it similar to ATS API {{TimelineEntity.Identifier}} . We are using this as part of our API hence names it as NodeAttributeID. I think if required we can rename it to AttributeIdentifierProto but Key does not seem to imply that it identifies the Attribute uniquely.
{quote}Map<String, String> to be changed an object which could be returned to user. This will make apis more cleaner and easier to maintain
{quote}
As discussed offline will make the modifications to proto objects returned for the user facing api's and will keep the NodeAttributeManager API as is.
> Revisit NodeAttribute class structure
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-7892
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7892
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: resourcemanager
> Reporter: Naganarasimha G R
> Assignee: Naganarasimha G R
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: YARN-7892-YARN-3409.001.patch, YARN-7892-YARN-3409.002.patch, YARN-7892-YARN-3409.003.WIP.patch, YARN-7892-YARN-3409.003.patch, YARN-7892-YARN-3409.004.patch, YARN-7892-YARN-3409.005.patch, YARN-7892-YARN-3409.006.patch
>
>
> In the existing structure, we had kept the type and value along with the attribute which would create confusion to the user to understand the APIs as they would not be clear as to what needs to be sent for type and value while fetching the mappings for node(s).
> As well as equals will not make sense when we compare only for prefix and name where as values for them might be different.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org