Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[MINOR][DOCS] Fix a typo in ContainerPlacementStrategy's class comment #28267

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

asclepiusaka
Copy link
Contributor

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

This PR fixes a typo in deploy/yarn/LocalityPreferredContainerPlacementStrategy.scala file.

Why are the changes needed?

To deliver correct explanation about how the placement policy works.

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No

How was this patch tested?

UT as specified, although shouldn't influence any functionality since it's in the comment.

@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Member

The change looks good but mind taking another look and see if there are some more typos around here? I am sure there are some more typos to fix.

@asclepiusaka
Copy link
Contributor Author

OK, will proofread again later today

@asclepiusaka
Copy link
Contributor Author

@HyukjinKwon read again and fixed several more words.

@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Member

ok to test

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ private[yarn] case class ContainerLocalityPreferences(nodes: Array[String], rack
* and cpus per task is 1, so the required container number is 15,
* and host ratio is (host1: 30, host2: 30, host3: 20, host4: 10).
*
* 1. If requested container number (18) is more than the required container number (15):
* 1. If the requested container number (18) is more than the required container number (15):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we can remove this the

* and the expected containers on each node would be (host1: 5, host2: 5, host3: 4, host4: 2),
* so the newly requested containers on each node would be updated to (host1: 4, host2: 4,
* host3: 3, host4: 1), 12 containers by total.
*
* 4.1 If requested container number (18) is more than newly required containers (12). Follow
* method 1 with updated ratio 4 : 4 : 3 : 1.
* method 1 with an updated ratio 4 : 4 : 3 : 1.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this an can be removed too.

Copy link
Member

@HyukjinKwon HyukjinKwon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for checking LGTM except a couple of comments.

@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Member

ok to test

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Apr 21, 2020

Test build #121563 has finished for PR 28267 at commit 94ee145.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Apr 21, 2020

Test build #121564 has finished for PR 28267 at commit 94ee145.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@srowen srowen closed this in 54b97b2 Apr 22, 2020
@srowen
Copy link
Member

srowen commented Apr 22, 2020

Close enough - merged to master/3.0

srowen pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2020
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR fixes a typo in deploy/yarn/LocalityPreferredContainerPlacementStrategy.scala file.

### Why are the changes needed?
To deliver correct explanation about how the placement policy works.

### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No

### How was this patch tested?
UT as specified, although shouldn't influence any functionality since it's in the comment.

Closes #28267 from asclepiusaka/master.

Authored-by: Cong Du <asclepius1993@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 54b97b2)
Signed-off-by: Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
4 participants