mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrei Budnik <abud...@mesosphere.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 62212: Send TASK_STARTING from the built-in executors. [1/2]
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2017 12:09:45 GMT


> On Sept. 12, 2017, 11:03 a.m., Andrei Budnik wrote:
> > src/docker/executor.cpp
> > Lines 141 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/62212/diff/1/?file=1819447#file1819447line141>
> >
> >     Do we really need to send `TASK_STARTING`, if we know that right after sending
`TASK_STARTING`, `launchTask` might send `TASK_FAILED`, e.g. in case of following checks:
> >     ```c++
> >     if (run.isSome()) {
> >      // ...
> >      status.set_state(TASK_FAILED);
> >     }
> >     ...
> >     if (runOptions.isError()) {
> >      // ...
> >      status.set_state(TASK_FAILED);
> >     }
> >     ```
> >     What is the semantics of `TASK_STARTING` - should an executor send it always
and unconditionally, or can we omit `TASK_STARTING` when we are pretty sure that we won't
be able to launch a task?
> >     Omitting `TASK_STARTING` before sending `TASK_FAILED` might be a good optimization,
if it's not important to send `TASK_STARTING` first.
> 
> Alexander Rukletsov wrote:
>     Agree with Andrei: we should send task starting if we try to start the task. If we
know that starting will never succeed, we don't even try, hence no task starting update :
)
> 
> Benno Evers wrote:
>     The previous documentation on `TASK_STARTING` was more of a loose guideline, so I
think we're de-facto deciding on the `TASK_STARTING` semantics in this review. Intuitively,
I find it most natural to have it mean "the executor is now aware of the task and will attempt
to start it", and not to create any special cases.

We have agreed that `TASK_STARTING` must be sent whenever an executor receives `launchTask`.
So, I'm dropping this `Fix it!`.


- Andrei


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/62212/#review185156
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Sept. 11, 2017, 9:16 a.m., Benno Evers wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/62212/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 11, 2017, 9:16 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Andrei Budnik and Alexander Rukletsov.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-7941
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7941
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This gives schedulers more information about a tasks status,
> in particular it gives a better estimate of a tasks start time
> and helps differentiating between tasks stuck in TASK_STAGING
> and tasks stuck in TASK_STARTING.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   docs/high-availability-framework-guide.md 73743aba31f9d0ca827d318e2ecb4752a91b1be0

>   src/docker/executor.cpp e9949f652cd8527991ebfdfbf14e68b4c958fe79 
>   src/launcher/default_executor.cpp 106b7f2e0244d211c66b237b5d1c51f43fc6e529 
>   src/launcher/executor.cpp 951597b576b4912541dd87d52dcb981393e58082 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62212/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benno Evers
> 
>


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