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 51069: Refactored `_commandHealthCheck` in health check.
Date Tue, 16 Aug 2016 23:50:05 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/51069/#review145931
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/health-check/health_checker.cpp (lines 256 - 257)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/51069/#comment212282>

    Why do we need to capture stdout and stderr?


- Alexander Rukletsov


On Aug. 15, 2016, 3:44 p.m., haosdent huang wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/51069/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 15, 2016, 3:44 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov, Benjamin Mahler, Gastón Kleiman, Gilbert
Song, Jie Yu, and Timothy Chen.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> * Removed blocking `Future::await` call.
> * Read stdout and stderr of the health check command.
> * Adjust the level of some logs.
> * Adjust some minor styles.
> * Change the interfaces of different health check handlers to
>   `Future<Nothing>` to make errors handling more easier.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/health-check/health_checker.hpp b4548f385e6bdf12f6bbc402a5d59ba8e165b8a5 
>   src/health-check/health_checker.cpp 45a5fe00a95a6e88b1990c1396e03082feb202bc 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/51069/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> haosdent huang
> 
>


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