From reviews-return-57185-apmail-mesos-reviews-archive=mesos.apache.org@mesos.apache.org Thu Mar 9 16:44:20 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-mesos-reviews-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-mesos-reviews-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6D59819FE4 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:44:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 18622 invoked by uid 500); 9 Mar 2017 16:44:20 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-mesos-reviews-archive@mesos.apache.org Received: (qmail 18590 invoked by uid 500); 9 Mar 2017 16:44:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact reviews-help@mesos.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: reviews@mesos.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list reviews@mesos.apache.org Received: (qmail 18568 invoked by uid 99); 9 Mar 2017 16:44:20 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 16:44:20 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 7D57FC2424; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:44:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.451 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.451 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=2, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, KAM_LOTSOFHASH=0.25, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QSIOU2KVY2cU; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:44:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id F3E145F1EE; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from reviews.apache.org (unknown [10.41.0.12]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E949CE0045; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from reviews-vm2.apache.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by reviews.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at reviews-vm2.apache.org) with ESMTP id BC282C408BC; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="===============7300885955413525799==" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Review Request 57167: Updated quota handler logic for hierarchical roles. From: Neil Conway To: Michael Park Cc: Mesos Reviewbot , Neil Conway , mesos Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 16:44:13 -0000 Message-ID: <20170309164413.10814.88110@reviews-vm2.apache.org> X-ReviewBoard-URL: https://reviews.apache.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Sender: Neil Conway X-ReviewGroup: mesos X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, OOF, AutoReply X-ReviewRequest-URL: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57167/ X-Sender: Neil Conway References: <20170228202324.19421.11442@reviews.apache.org> In-Reply-To: <20170228202324.19421.11442@reviews.apache.org> Reply-To: Neil Conway X-ReviewRequest-Repository: mesos --===============7300885955413525799== MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57167/ ----------------------------------------------------------- (Updated March 9, 2017, 4:44 p.m.) Review request for mesos and Michael Park. Changes ------- Introduce `QuotaTree`, other fixes. Repository: mesos Description (updated) ------- The quota'd resources for a nested role are "included" within the quota'd resources for that role's parent. Hence, the quota of a node must always be greater than or equal to the sum of the quota'd resources of that role's children. When creating and removing quota, we must ensure that this invariant is not violated. When computing the cluster capacity heuristic, we must ensure that we do not "double-count" quota'd resources: e.g., if the cluster has a total capacity of 100 CPUs, role "x" has a quota guarantee of 80 CPUs, and role "x/y" has a quota guarantee of 40 CPUs, this does NOT violate the cluster capacity heuristic. Diffs (updated) ----- src/master/quota_handler.cpp ce1f0644a56e85a99d8c3742d00940a1bfae3be3 src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp cdf1f15b7802439b28405ca8f6634ce83e886630 src/tests/master_quota_tests.cpp e109656492bc5ac65e398b6b61e7321072b162d3 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57167/diff/2/ Changes: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57167/diff/1-2/ Testing ------- `make check` Thanks, Neil Conway --===============7300885955413525799==--