mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benjamin Bannier <benjamin.bann...@mesosphere.io>
Subject Re: Review Request 65039: Tested reconciliation when operation is dropped en route to agent.
Date Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:44:54 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#review195539
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp
Lines 1613-1624 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#comment274746>

    We future-proofed and clarified setting the resource-provider capability in https://reviews.apache.org/r/64891/.
Could you update the code here to follow the same pattern?



src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp
Lines 1652 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#comment274747>

    Did you make sure that the ordering `updateSlave2` will always be ready before `updateSlave1`?
    
    I see that `FUTURE_PROTOBUF` leverages `EXPECT_CALL` (via `FutureMessage`), so I wonder
if we need something like `::testing::InSequence` to make this this test safe.



src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp
Lines 1656 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#comment274748>

    Would it make sense to have the whole test run with paused clock?



src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp
Lines 1677 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#comment274749>

    Let's move this right before the code setting up the mock expectation.



src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp
Lines 1695-1696 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#comment274750>

    Is this needed? Adding a framework should already trigger a allocation.



src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp
Lines 1715 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#comment274751>

    Could we bind the return value here and make sure we actually dropped a message by awaiting
it to become ready?



src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp
Lines 1797 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/#comment274753>

    This seems unneeded.


- Benjamin Bannier


On Jan. 9, 2018, 10:25 a.m., Greg Mann wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 9, 2018, 10:25 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier, Chun-Hung Hsiao, Gaston Kleiman, and Jie
Yu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-8373
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-8373
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This patch adds
> StorageLocalResourceProviderTest.ROOT_ReconcileDroppedOperation
> in order to verify that reconciliation is performed correctly
> when an operation is dropped on its way from the master to the
> agent.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp bbfe95e9818f25fdd5405db3ad2fe355e023f743

> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65039/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> sudo make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Greg Mann
> 
>


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