mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Rukletsov <ruklet...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 56210: Reused previous task status to generate a new one in command executor.
Date Thu, 09 Feb 2017 11:18:46 GMT


> On Feb. 8, 2017, 1:08 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/launcher/executor.cpp, line 720
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/56210/diff/1/?file=1622060#file1622060line720>
> >
> >     looks like this review doesn't use `reason` argument, so I wouldn't add it in
this review. lets add it in the review that needs it.

A'd rather keep it here, because I would like API to look consistent. What are general things
people should probably set if they generate a status update? State, reason, message. They
are not specific to any particular update or feature (e.g., check update).


> On Feb. 8, 2017, 1:08 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/launcher/executor.cpp, line 752
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/56210/diff/1/?file=1622060#file1622060line752>
> >
> >     ditto. no `reason` argument in this review.

See above.


- Alexander


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/56210/#review164584
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Feb. 8, 2017, 4:56 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/56210/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 8, 2017, 4:56 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Gastón Kleiman and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-6906
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6906
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When a new task status update is generated in the executor, we have
> to make sure specific data is duplicated from the previous update
> to, e.g., avoid shadowing of those data during reconciliation. For
> instance, consider a check status being sent; in this status update
> we must include the latest known health information.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/launcher/executor.cpp d9417ce1d5b108f5292a66010eab80f11552a969 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/56210/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> See https://reviews.apache.org/r/56218/
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rukletsov
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message