mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Neil Conway <neil.con...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 53202: Avoided CHECK failure with pre-1.0 agents.
Date Wed, 26 Oct 2016 21:59:31 GMT


> On Oct. 26, 2016, 9:54 p.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote:
> > src/master/master.cpp, line 6047
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/53202/diff/1/?file=1546421#file1546421line6047>
> >
> >     If neither of the above is true, can we log a warning? We recommend aganist
this situation but in operations there's always possbility of straggler hosts. A warning would
be helpful.

Logging a warning seems a bit ugly because it seems like an ad-hoc place to put a version
compatibility check; if we have N places in the code that contain such warnings, it seems
like it will be annoying to maintain and result in ugly log output.

I'd prefer to log a warning when an agent with an unsupported version registers/re-registers
with the master.


- Neil


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/53202/#review153950
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 26, 2016, 7:51 p.m., Neil Conway wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/53202/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 26, 2016, 7:51 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Vinod Kone and Jiang Yan Xu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-6483
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6483
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> We don't guarantee compatibility with pre-1.0 agents. However, since it
> is easy to avoid a CHECK failure in the master when an old agent
> re-registers, it seems worth doing so.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/master.cpp 23ddb995b4ad0fcdb589974308a2e81ececdad31 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/53202/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> `make check`
> 
> Disabled the code that fills-in `frameworks.recovered`; verified that `PartitionTest.DisconnectedFramework`
dies with a `CHECK` failure if this RR is not applied but passes this with RR applied.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Neil Conway
> 
>


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