Earlier, since single executor, it meant something else.
Now, there is a difference... I don't think this is what we would want.
Though, I would defer to others on this .. @matrix any thoughts ?
 On 12-May-2014 5:32 am, "Nan Zhu" <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> In core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/deploy/master/Master.scala:
>
> > @@ -466,30 +466,14 @@ private[spark] class Master(
> >     * launched an executor for the app on it (right now the standalone backend doesn't like having
> >     * two executors on the same worker).
> >     */
> > -  def canUse(app: ApplicationInfo, worker: WorkerInfo): Boolean = {
> > -    worker.memoryFree >= app.desc.memoryPerSlave && !worker.hasExecutor(app)
> > +  private def canUse(app: ApplicationInfo, worker: WorkerInfo): Boolean = {
> > +    worker.memoryFree >= app.desc.memoryPerExecutor && !worker.hasExecutor(app) &&
> > +    worker.coresFree > 0
>
> I think so....and we can only assign the executor to the same worker in
> the subsequent schedule() calls...
>
> and this logic has been here for a long while (at least since 0.8.x), the
> scheduling mode proposed in this PR is just to relax this constraint
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/731/files#r12511647>
> .
>