[YARN-3991] Investigate if we need an atomic way to set both memory and CPU on Resource

• Type: Bug
• Status: Open
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Unresolved
• Affects Version/s: 2.7.1
• Labels: capacityscheduler fairscheduler scheduler
• Assignee: Varun Saxena
• Reporter: Karthik Kambatla
• Created: 29/Jul/15 16:49
• Updated: 07/Jan/17 01:40

Description

While reviewing another patch, noticed that we have independent methods to set memory and CPU.

Do we need another method to set them both atomically? Otherwise, would two threads trying to set both values lose any updates?