YARN-10834. Intra-queue preemption: apps that don't use defined custom resource won't be preempted. Contributed by Eric Payne.

hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/yarn/server/resourcemanager/monitor/capacity/FifoIntraQueuePreemptionPlugin.java

@@ -288,8 +288,9 @@ public class FifoIntraQueuePreemptionPlugin
 
       // Once unallocated resource is 0, we can stop assigning ideal per app.
       if (Resources.lessThanOrEqual(rc, clusterResource,
-          queueReassignableResource, Resources.none()) || rc
-          .isAnyMajorResourceZeroOrNegative(queueReassignableResource)) {
+          queueReassignableResource, Resources.none()) ||
+          (rc.isAnyMajorResourceZeroOrNegative(queueReassignableResource)
+              && context.getInQueuePreemptionConservativeDRF())) {
         continue;
       }
 

hadoop-yarn-project/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-server/hadoop-yarn-server-resourcemanager/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/yarn/server/resourcemanager/monitor/capacity/TestProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicyIntraQueueWithDRF.java

@@ -18,11 +18,14 @@
 
 package org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.monitor.capacity;
 
+import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.api.protocolrecords.ResourceTypes;
 import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.api.records.Resource;
+import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.api.records.ResourceInformation;
 import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.monitor.capacity.mockframework.ProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicyMockFramework;
 import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.scheduler.capacity.CapacitySchedulerConfiguration;
 import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.server.resourcemanager.scheduler.capacity.LeafQueue;
 import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.util.resource.DominantResourceCalculator;
+import org.apache.hadoop.yarn.util.resource.ResourceUtils;
 import org.junit.Before;
 import org.junit.Test;
 
@@ -189,6 +192,86 @@ public class TestProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicyIntraQueueWithDRF
             getAppAttemptId(1))));
   }
 
+  @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
+  @Test
+  public void testIntraQueuePreemptionFairOrdering3ResourcesWithStrictAndRelaxedDRF()
+      throws IOException {
+    /**
+     * Continue to allow intra-queue preemption when only one of the user's
+     * resources is above the user limit.
+     * Queue structure is:
+     *
+     * <pre>
+     *       root
+     *     /  |
+     *    a   b
+     * </pre>
+     *
+     * Guaranteed resource of a and b are 30720:300 and 30720:300 Total cluster
+     * resource = 61440:600.
+     * Scenario: Queue B has one running app using 61720:60 resources with no
+     * pending resources, and one app with no used resources and 30720:30
+     * pending resources.
+     *
+     * The first part of the test is to show what happens when the conservative
+     * DRF property is set. Since the memory is above and the vcores is below
+     * the user limit, only the minimum number of containers is allowed.
+     * In the second part, since conservative DRF is relaxed, all containers
+     * needed are allowed to be preempted (minus the AM size).
+     */
+
+    conf.set(CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.INTRAQUEUE_PREEMPTION_ORDER_POLICY,
+        "userlimit_first");
+    conf.set(CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.PREFIX
+        + "root.b." + CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.ORDERING_POLICY, "fair");
+    conf.setBoolean(
+        CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.IN_QUEUE_PREEMPTION_CONSERVATIVE_DRF,
+        true);
+    String RESOURCE_1 = "res1";
+    riMap.put(RESOURCE_1, ResourceInformation
+        .newInstance(RESOURCE_1, "", 0, ResourceTypes.COUNTABLE, 0,
+            Integer.MAX_VALUE));
+
+    ResourceUtils.initializeResourcesFromResourceInformationMap(riMap);
+
+    String labelsConfig = "=61440:600,true;";
+    String nodesConfig = // n1 has no label
+        "n1= res=61440:600";
+    String queuesConfig =
+        // guaranteed,max,used,pending,reserved
+        "root(=[61440:600 61440:600 61440:600 30720:30 0]);" + // root
+            "-a(=[30720:300 61440:600 0:0 0:0 0]);" + // a
+            "-b(=[30720:300 61440:600 61440:60 30720:30 0]);";  // b
+
+    String appsConfig =
+        "b\t" + "(1,1024:1,n1,,60,false,0:0,user1);" + // app1 in b
+        "b\t" + "(1,0:0,n1,,0,false,30720:30,user3);"; // app2 in b
+
+    buildEnv(labelsConfig, nodesConfig, queuesConfig, appsConfig);
+    Resource ul = Resource.newInstance(30720, 300);
+    when(((LeafQueue)(cs.getQueue("root.b")))
+        .getResourceLimitForAllUsers(any(), any(), any(), any())
+    ).thenReturn(ul);
+    policy.editSchedule();
+
+    verify(eventHandler, times(0)).handle(argThat(
+        new TestProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicy.IsPreemptionRequestFor(
+            getAppAttemptId(1))));
+    reset(eventHandler);
+
+    conf.setBoolean(
+        CapacitySchedulerConfiguration.IN_QUEUE_PREEMPTION_CONSERVATIVE_DRF,
+        false);
+    buildEnv(labelsConfig, nodesConfig, queuesConfig, appsConfig);
+    when(((LeafQueue)(cs.getQueue("root.b")))
+        .getResourceLimitForAllUsers(any(), any(), any(), any())
+    ).thenReturn(ul);
+    policy.editSchedule();
+    verify(eventHandler, times(29)).handle(argThat(
+        new TestProportionalCapacityPreemptionPolicy.IsPreemptionRequestFor(
+            getAppAttemptId(1))));
+  }
+
   @Test
   public void testIntraQueuePreemptionWithDominantVCoreResource()
       throws IOException {