mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Park" <mcyp...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 40247: Added HTTP endpoints for creating and destroying persistent volumes.
Date Wed, 25 Nov 2015 05:01:05 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#review107913
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Looks good overall! Some nit-picks, some thoughts on naming, etc.


docs/persistent-volume.md (line 248)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167245>

    It looks pretty clear that we allow the creation and destruction of multiple volumes via
these endpoints. Should we call them `create-volumes` and `destroy-volumes` respectively?



docs/persistent-volume.md (lines 258 - 259)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167236>

    Sorry to be nit-picking, but this still looks like the `-u` and below is 1 space further
indented than the `-i`?



src/master/http.cpp (line 541)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167238>

    I feel like this could be taken as "remove/filter the disk resources" rather than "remove
the DiskInfo portion of each resource" :(
    
    I thought maybe `removeVolumes` but I think that has the same issue as before. I also
think we should keep in mind that we may introduce an alias for, and deprecate `flatten`.
    
    Another one would be `removeDiskInfos` to be more indicative that the `DiskInfo` portion
of the `Resource`s are being removed, but then the alias for `flatten` would end up as something
like, `removeRolesAndReservationInfos`...
    
    This brings me to maybe declaring the state in which this resource is being transformed
into. Something like... `makeRegularDisk` and `makeUnreserved`?
    
    What do you think?



src/master/http.cpp (lines 541 - 551)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167239>

    As far as its implementation, let's do:
    
    ```cpp
    static Resources removeDisks(Resources resources)
    {
      foreach (Resource& resource, resources) {
        resource.clear_disk();
      }
      return resources;
    }
    ```



src/master/http.cpp (lines 614 - 617)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167240>

    ```cpp
    Option<Error> validate = validation::operation::validate(
        operation.create(), slave->checkpointedResources);
    ```
    
    or
    
    ```cpp
    Option<Error> validate = validation::operation::validate(
        operation.create(),
        slave->checkpointedResources);
    ```



src/master/http.cpp (lines 704 - 707)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167241>

    Similar to above.



src/master/http.cpp (line 1046)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167242>

    `flatten()` removes `role` and `ReservationInfo` from the resources.



src/tests/mesos.hpp (line 520)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167243>

    `s/reservationPrinciple/reservationPrincipal/`



src/tests/persistent_volume_endpoints_tests.cpp (lines 159 - 162)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167246>

    I would suggest that we reorder these since we expect `registered` to occur before `resourceOffers`.
Although functionally, it should have no difference.
    
    Occurences below as well.



src/tests/persistent_volume_endpoints_tests.cpp (line 277)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167247>

    We should perhaps use `frameworkInfo.role()` here to make sure that it matches the dynamically
reserved role?



src/tests/persistent_volume_endpoints_tests.cpp (line 382)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167248>

    Would the following serve as good documentation of the test?
    
    ```
    ASSERT_NE(frameworkInfo.role(), "role2");
    ```



src/tests/persistent_volume_endpoints_tests.cpp (line 443)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/#comment167249>

    This also needs to match the dynamically reserved role, right? `frameworkInfo.role()`?


- Michael Park


On Nov. 23, 2015, 5:06 p.m., Neil Conway wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 23, 2015, 5:06 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Greg Mann and Michael Park.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2455
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2455
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added HTTP endpoints for creating and destroying persistent volumes.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   docs/persistent-volume.md 0951ccb69daaa19b959e11cf3bf972a674a58305 
>   docs/reservation.md 81f21c3755b216b0932876c1ddd9de4d3fbe814a 
>   src/Makefile.am 8d14ff803249b5b81b696d40d37e013960dee41b 
>   src/master/http.cpp 1c4f1406f5d917f5d655a7d61d311365f8999ce0 
>   src/master/master.hpp d4b1edde98925fd51e056f253758afea779be9ed 
>   src/master/master.cpp d2bc83cd77ae7fe723ccb35a7c1e0b70a04a0d6e 
>   src/tests/mesos.hpp b3f69ccb9870b17a335a2fe7dbf2802c1b709e6b 
>   src/tests/persistent_volume_endpoints_tests.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/40247/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> (1) make check, including newly added tests
> 
> (2) Manually created/removed persistent volumes via HTTP endpoints + curl.
> 
> (3) Previewed docs in Github gist.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Neil Conway
> 
>


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