mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vinod Kone <vinodk...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 43664: Modified SchedulerTest.Subscribe to not test for failover.
Date Sat, 27 Feb 2016 02:10:28 GMT


> On Feb. 27, 2016, 2:08 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp, line 136
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/diff/2/?file=1253297#file1253297line136>
> >
> >     why will there be future invocations?

I see the reasoning in the next review. Maybe move this particular change to that review?


- Vinod


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/#review121048
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Feb. 17, 2016, 10:45 p.m., Anand Mazumdar wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 17, 2016, 10:45 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3570
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3570
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This change modifies the existing `SchedulerTest.Subscribe` to just test if we are able
to subscribe with the master instead of also testing for scheduler failover. 
> 
> Added a `TODO` to add a separate test for testing scheduler failover once MESOS-3339
is resolved. The reasoning for doing so was that the callback interface would simplify writing
the test.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp 37f17094b3f11fd02468bf51b51b8e65ccb350a9 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43664/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Anand Mazumdar
> 
>


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