[GitHub] mesos pull request #265: Update presentations.md

Github user packtpartner commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/mesos/pull/265#discussion_r173075337 --- Diff: docs/presentations.md --- @@ -133,6 +133,10 @@ Presented Summer 2010 at [Yahoo](http://yahoo.com) # Apache Mesos - Training _(Listed

[GitHub] mesos pull request #270: Update presentations.md

GitHub user packtpartner opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/mesos/pull/270 Update presentations.md Created another PR without "Tetra Tutorials Team" You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/packtpartner/mesos

MesosCon 2018

Fellow Mesos Community Members, Many of you have probably seen the announcement for Mesosphere Advance, a conference co-located at CloudNativeCon. Given the deep involvement that Mesosphere has had with past MesosCons, this has left many of you asking us if Mesosphere Advance replaces MesosCon.

[GitHub] mesos issue #266: Tasks docs

Github user bmahler commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/mesos/pull/266 @kohend can you close this PR based on my comment above? ---

[GitHub] mesos issue #266: Tasks docs

Github user bmahler commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/mesos/pull/266 We've removed these docs entirely from the repo since they were very stale and they now get generated as part of the website publishing, you can find them here:

Re: Authorization Logging

Are you looking for a reviewer for these? Will Greg have time to review? On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 3:19 AM, Alexander Rojas wrote: > This is a good question on where to do the audit, should it happen in the > authorization module itself, or in the caller. It doesn’t help

Re: Reconsidering `allocatable` check in the allocator

+1 about it not being about network traffic. I the direction we want to head towards is to express and enforce a minimum granularity for scalar resources. For example: CPU: 0.001, if we say that we can only deal with milli-cpus. Disk: 1, if we say that we can only deal with the MB level of disk

[Containerization WG] Sync Agenda for March 8th, 2018

Hi folks, Tomorrow's WG meeting starts at 9 am PST. We will have 3 agenda items to discuss: - [Andrei, Greg, Gilbert]: Resolve the docker daemon hanging issue and do backport. - [zhitao] Persistent volume resize support (MESOS-4965 ).

Re: Reconsidering `allocatable` check in the allocator

> On Mar 7, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Benjamin Bannier > wrote: > > Hi, > >> Chatted with BenM offline on this. There's another option what both of us >> agreed that it's probably better than any of the ones mentioned above. >> >> The idea is to make `allocable`

Re: Reconsidering `allocatable` check in the allocator

Hi, > Chatted with BenM offline on this. There's another option what both of us > agreed that it's probably better than any of the ones mentioned above. > > The idea is to make `allocable` return the portion of the input resources > that are allocatable, and strip the unelectable portion. > >

Re: Reconsidering `allocatable` check in the allocator

If we are about to offer some of the resources from a particular agent, why would we filter anything at all? I doubt we should be concerned about the size of the offer representation travelling through the network. If available resources are "cpus:0.001,gpus:1" and we want to allocate GPU, what is