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 69162: Added agent and resource provider IDs to operation status messages.
Date Tue, 27 Nov 2018 17:59:59 GMT


> On Nov. 20, 2018, 2:57 a.m., Chun-Hung Hsiao wrote:
> > include/mesos/scheduler/scheduler.proto
> > Line 140 (original), 140 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/69162/diff/3/?file=2106989#file2106989line140>
> >
> >     It seems more consistent with `TaskStatus` if we put `slave_id` and `resource_provider_id`
in `OperationStatus`. What's the pros and cons of doing that instead?

We discussed this offline, and I moved the information into `TaskStatus`.

The gist of the discussion was that moving it into `OperationStatus` instead of `UpdateOperationStatus`
introduces less coupling and imposes less future restrictions (just like for `TaskStatus`).


> On Nov. 20, 2018, 2:57 a.m., Chun-Hung Hsiao wrote:
> > src/messages/messages.cpp
> > Lines 146-149 (original), 156-162 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/69162/diff/3/?file=2106992#file2106992line156>
> >
> >     How about the following:
> >     ```
> >       if (update.has_resource_provider_id()) {
> >         stream << " from resource provider " << update.resource_provider_id();
> >       }
> >     
> >       if (update.has_slave_id()) {
> >         stream << " on agent " << update.slave_id();
> >       }
> >     ```

Not an issue anymore.


- Benjamin


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/69162/#review210694
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Nov. 12, 2018, 9:49 p.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/69162/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 12, 2018, 9:49 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Chun-Hung Hsiao, Gastón Kleiman, and James DeFelice.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-9293
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-9293
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This patch add agent and resource provide IDs to
> `UpdateOperationStatus` and `UpdateOperationStatusMessage`. With that
> frameworks are able to reconcile enough information after failover to
> construct operation acknowledgements.
> 
> We will add code to populate these fields in a follow-up patch.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/scheduler/scheduler.proto f6a780a7b75878b9e74402a28a25bb868f7ac36f 
>   include/mesos/v1/scheduler/scheduler.proto fcfec5e417463103e98dd6917722b4fde41cac7c

>   src/internal/evolve.cpp aa60efed5a28ed4d847a4a27aa8e994cda82175d 
>   src/messages/messages.cpp dd8f60ecdbc06d10be1152bee1ddb65feaaf8fbb 
>   src/messages/messages.proto 41e6a8a2eab0ae7c2878c1d3286c5dea0eb68ed7 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/69162/diff/4/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> `make check`
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benjamin Bannier
> 
>


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