mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Greg Mann" <g...@mesosphere.io>
Subject Re: Review Request 39987: [3/5] Added 'Master::authorize(Un)reserveResources()' for Reserve/Unreserve.
Date Tue, 01 Dec 2015 16:41:42 GMT


> On Dec. 1, 2015, 2:24 p.m., Michael Park wrote:
> > src/master/master.cpp, line 2771
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/39987/diff/9/?file=1149276#file1149276line2771>
> >
> >     Why is it that we need to perform validation within authorization? We perform
`authorizeTask` with a `TaskInfo` that has not been validated yet, and take care of it later
on. Does that pattern not work here?

That pattern would work here, and the original patches I posted worked that way. We ended
up switching to this solution because it makes for a cleaner implementation and eliminates
some redundant code. However, it does come at the cost of making error messaging more difficult
(as you noted in another patch) and decreasing the separation of functionality that can make
debugging easier. I don't have a strong preference for either path at the moment. Perhaps
Jie could chime in with his thoughts?


- Greg


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/39987/#review108496
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Nov. 30, 2015, 8:35 p.m., Greg Mann wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/39987/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 30, 2015, 8:35 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B, Jie Yu, Michael Park, and Till Toenshoff.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3062
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3062
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added 'Master::authorize(Un)reserveResources()' for Reserve/Unreserve.
> Note: this review is continued from https://reviews.apache.org/r/37125/
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/master.hpp 96951e766de32842197506504e5ac67a2caa3efe 
>   src/master/master.cpp b918ae4a0e7dc3cd41165fc4b683ae7b6f031821 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39987/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> This is the third in a chain of 5 patches. `make check` was used to test after all patches
were applied.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Greg Mann
> 
>


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