From reviews-return-60729-apmail-mesos-reviews-archive=mesos.apache.org@mesos.apache.org Wed May 17 21:14:57 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-mesos-reviews-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-mesos-reviews-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EC013199E9 for ; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 3195 invoked by uid 500); 17 May 2017 21:14:56 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-mesos-reviews-archive@mesos.apache.org Received: (qmail 3163 invoked by uid 500); 17 May 2017 21:14:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact reviews-help@mesos.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: reviews@mesos.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list reviews@mesos.apache.org Received: (qmail 3152 invoked by uid 99); 17 May 2017 21:14:56 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:56 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 36DBF1857B1; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.451 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.451 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=2, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, KAM_LOTSOFHASH=0.25, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I0_eBYUmQp4J; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id CA7CE5F523; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from reviews.apache.org (unknown [10.41.0.12]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1F533E02CA; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from reviews-vm2.apache.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by reviews.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at reviews-vm2.apache.org) with ESMTP id 70D49C4039B; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:52 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="===============5577168842539976038==" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Review Request 59294: Optionally scale egress bandwidth with CPU. From: Jie Yu To: Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham , Jie Yu , Dmitry Zhuk , Ilya Pronin Cc: Ian Downes , mesos Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 21:14:52 -0000 Message-ID: <20170517211452.55002.49545@reviews-vm2.apache.org> X-ReviewBoard-URL: https://reviews.apache.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Sender: Jie Yu X-ReviewGroup: mesos X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, OOF, AutoReply X-ReviewRequest-URL: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59294/ X-Sender: Jie Yu References: <20170515205624.37593.42274@reviews-vm2.apache.org> In-Reply-To: <20170515205624.37593.42274@reviews-vm2.apache.org> Reply-To: Jie Yu X-ReviewRequest-Repository: mesos --===============5577168842539976038== MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59294/#review175114 ----------------------------------------------------------- src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp Lines 586-588 (patched) Instead of shelling out, i'd say we just introduce support in the nl library. IN fact, we already have a patch chain starts here to support that https://reviews.apache.org/r/45605/ src/slave/flags.cpp Lines 770-786 (patched) This sounds like a heuristic. Any justification why this heuristic? Wondering if label based solution is better? For instance, the isolator will look for a special label of the task/executor. The label specifies the egress rate limit which can override the default rate limit. Something along this line? Then, the custom logic can be injected into a label decrorator, rather than first class it here? - Jie Yu On May 15, 2017, 8:56 p.m., Ian Downes wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/59294/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 15, 2017, 8:56 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Dmitry Zhuk, Ilya Pronin, Jie Yu, and Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham. > > > Bugs: MESOS-7508 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7508 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Add support to isolators/port_mapping for optionally scaling egress bandwidth with CPU and with minimum and maximum limits. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.hpp 9d38289c7161d5e931053b587d115684ccc44c94 > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp cd008aaebcd42554a9a81d2b059269546f59c966 > src/slave/flags.hpp e5784ef81ad0720c7ec061ee0b28b8fadae77afd > src/slave/flags.cpp bc63a6a4cb6115b4b4d592e67e34045f52b50d4c > src/tests/containerizer/port_mapping_tests.cpp a528382e8b4831b9c7e8dcc877a5e242909f0cd5 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59294/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > # added a new test > $ make check > > > Thanks, > > Ian Downes > > --===============5577168842539976038==--