mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benjamin Mahler <bmah...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Review Request 52642: Improved the validation of RESERVE operations.
Date Thu, 03 Nov 2016 22:39:08 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#review154824
-----------------------------------------------------------



Thanks Gaston! The fix looks good, but some of the tests don't seem to match their comments?

Also, I commented on the unreserve validation (see below) but we can deal with that separately.

After the test cleanups this should be good to go.


src/master/validation.cpp (lines 1454 - 1456)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#comment224539>

    Looks like you forgot to close the quote on the last line. Can you put quotes on the same
line? It's less likely we forget to close this way:
    
    ```
          return Error(
              "A reserve operation was attempted for role"
              " '" + role.get() + "', but there is a reserved resource"
              " in the request with role '" + resource.role() + "'");
    ```



src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp (lines 207 - 218)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#comment224540>

    Hm.. it's too bad this test wasn't doing what its comment said, otherwise we'd have found
this earlier :)
    
    Just a note, I find the following a bit clearer for the validation assertions:
    
    ```
    Option<Error> error = operation::validate(...);
    
    EXPECT_SOME(error);
    ```
    
    But since all of the tests don't use this pattern right now, it would be better to do
a sweep.



src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp (lines 207 - 208)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#comment224548>

    How about just saying "reservation role" and "framework role" to disambiguate these, here
and in all of the comments below.



src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp (lines 221 - 222)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#comment224541>

    Hm.. this comment does not match the test logic? Here your framework has `"role"` role,
not `"*"` role.



src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp (lines 237 - 238)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#comment224546>

    It looks like if you swapped this test comment with the comment immediately above, then
the comments would become accurate?



src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp (line 343)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#comment224551>

    Shouldn't we be checking that a framework can't remove a reservation for a role that doesn't
match the framework's role? This technically shouldn't happen because we wouldn't have offered
the resources to the framework, but this unfortunately requires some "non-local reasoning"
to figure out why we don't have to check it.



src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp (lines 346 - 348)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/#comment224549>

    Have you gone through these tests? They also seem confusing. For example, this one says
"framework with a principal" but it doesn't provide principal to the validate call. I would
expect to see reservation principal vs framework principal, no?


- Benjamin Mahler


On Oct. 24, 2016, 3:25 p.m., Gastón Kleiman wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 24, 2016, 3:25 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov and Michael Park.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-6142
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6142
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Don't allow a reservation if the framework role doesn't match the role
> of all the resources.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/http.cpp 05d29906a73fb049c085abca05b75ec68c259d26 
>   src/master/master.cpp 23ddb995b4ad0fcdb589974308a2e81ececdad31 
>   src/master/validation.hpp 035f721c610ae566c89a1cf0e65ff0df11679f15 
>   src/master/validation.cpp f690a9eacd278b51a52f5588dbeea377df074435 
>   src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp a5d8610bd61822cdf55cbc8d7056e5cf8fecfa54 
>   src/tests/reservation_tests.cpp 6c28ab4557f342134efce0ad7cb174a5adb4dc10 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52642/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gastón Kleiman
> 
>


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