mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jie Yu <yujie....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 59135: Refactored resource handling to use resource providers.
Date Wed, 31 May 2017 23:57:05 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#review174441
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/master/master.hpp
Lines 159 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment247615>

    please use explicit `=delete` here.



src/master/master.hpp
Lines 124 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249912>

    I'd kill this line. Let's group logically connected methods in a single block



src/master/master.hpp
Lines 126 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249913>

    kill this line



src/master/master.hpp
Lines 128 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249914>

    kill this line



src/master/master.hpp
Lines 133 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249915>

    `info` contain `id` already?



src/master/master.hpp
Lines 212 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249918>

    Can you put some comments on this?
    
    Also, I suggest to use `resourceProvider` instead of just `provider`



src/master/master.hpp
Lines 250-254 (original), 270-274 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249933>

    I believe this should be in resource provider as well. This is very resource provider
specific.



src/master/master.hpp
Lines 250-254 (original), 270-274 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249935>

    I believe this should be in resource provider as well. This is very resource provider
specific.



src/master/master.cpp
Lines 9402-9407 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249926>

    Let's move this to protobuf utils



src/master/master.cpp
Lines 9540-9553 (original), 9587-9600 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/#comment249925>

    Any reason you have this function kept?


- Jie Yu


On May 31, 2017, 12:43 p.m., Jan Schlicht wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 31, 2017, 12:43 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-7592
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7592
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This refactoring add the 'ResourceProvider' abstraction for all
> resource related operations. Every agent instance has a resource
> provider. Only the checkpointed resources aren't abstracted away as this
> is specific to agents. This abstraction can be re-used for local
> resource providers and external resource providers.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/common/protobuf_utils.cpp 3fcaf786b29a00f003c10b0f1614a2c7eddc725d 
>   src/master/http.cpp eb80830fa003ad8f58243d3dc4cec9e03285e96f 
>   src/master/master.hpp 89d0790fd5fea59e74276f462581fe0073594732 
>   src/master/master.cpp 14007e08f509446005423e223d5dd76a70744e27 
>   src/master/quota_handler.cpp 7fe55808d4561ae5a8850ad904d09a7c65e014ce 
>   src/master/weights_handler.cpp a4d2fed758878f3e2b9557a61965816aa9e0399c 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59135/diff/4/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jan Schlicht
> 
>


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