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 42355: Removed the timeout from the filter.
Date Thu, 21 Jan 2016 18:59:44 GMT


> On Jan. 21, 2016, 7:17 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp, lines 544-560
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42355/diff/2/?file=1202267#file1202267line544>
> >
> >     In the bottom section of this test, I'm not sure folks without our context will
understand what is being done and what is expected to occur.
> >     
> >     Maybe we just write something as simple as the following, for example:
> >     
> >     The allocator will ensure that offer filters are removed after at least one
batch allocation has occurred. Therefore, we expect that after the timeout elapses, the filter
remains active for the next allocation and the resources are sent to framework1.
> >     
> >     Then, I'm curious why you don't have a subsequent allocation to verify that
the offer filter was really removed, is there a test for that?

Good suggestions. I'll reword comments and add one more allocation.


> On Jan. 21, 2016, 7:17 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp, line 546
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/42355/diff/2/?file=1202267#file1202267line546>
> >
> >     Can you use offerFilter.refuse_seconds() here? Or create a 'timeout' variable
which is used to both set the offerFitlter.refuse_seconds and is passed to this advance()
call?

Yep, makes sense. Thanks!


- Alexander


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42355/#review115583
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 19, 2016, 11:32 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42355/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 19, 2016, 11:32 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Joris Van Remoortere.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4302
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4302
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Without the timeout, we rely on filter expiration only. This guarantees
> that filter removal is scheduled after `allocate()` if the allocator is
> backlogged given default parameters are used. Additionally we ensure the
> filter timeout is at least as big as the allocation interval.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.cpp 48acde69b1a2f305b568a7e322a58708063dd30a

>   src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp 9362dd306497ba01e0f387c3862456cdcac6f863

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42355/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> On Mac OS 10.10.4:
> 
> `make check`
> 
> `GTEST_FILTER="HierarchicalAllocatorTest.FilterTimeout" ./bin/mesos-tests.sh --gtest_repeat=100
--gtest_break_on_failure` passes with the patch and fails without.
> 
> `GTEST_FILTER="HierarchicalAllocatorTest.*" ./bin/mesos-tests.sh --gtest_repeat=100 --gtest_break_on_failure`
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rukletsov
> 
>


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