> On April 10, 2014, 12:28 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/metrics/metric.hpp, lines 21-22
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18718/diff/26/?file=554513#file554513line21>
> >
> >     I thought the plan was to remove these and just have a 'name' which 
> > could be built up out of multiple pieces separated by a library defined 
> > delimiter (defaulted to '/')?

I'd forgotten about that part of the discussion. I'll remove context 
everywhere. Perhaps we can add the building of the name in a future patch to 
avoid adding more complication here for this one?


> On April 10, 2014, 12:28 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/metrics/metrics.cpp, line 68
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18718/diff/26/?file=554515#file554515line68>
> >
> >     Why is this necessary?

erasing the Owned pointer from the hashmap doesn't delete the memory associated 
with it.


> On April 10, 2014, 12:28 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/metrics/metrics.cpp, lines 90-91
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18718/diff/26/?file=554515#file554515line90>
> >
> >     Why not just:
> >     
> >     return await(metrics.values())

src/metrics/metrics.cpp:77:10: error: no matching function for call to 'await'
  return await(futures.values())
         ^~~~~
include/process/collect.hpp:251:39: note: candidate function [with T = double] 
not viable: expects an l-value for 1st argument
inline Future<std::list<Future<T> > > await(
                                      ^
include/process/collect.hpp:270:47: note: candidate function template not 
viable: requires 2 arguments, but 1 was provided
Future<tuples::tuple<Future<T1>, Future<T2>>> await(


> On April 10, 2014, 12:28 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/metrics/metrics.cpp, line 103
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18718/diff/26/?file=554515#file554515line103>
> >
> >     This should always be ready! Also WS.

Not true - a Gauge can fail.


- Dominic


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/18718/#review40062
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 10, 2014, 1:31 p.m., Dominic Hamon wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/18718/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 10, 2014, 1:31 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-1036
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1036
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/Makefile.am c785c4dd852eacaec1be11c68e0b0b95a328d96b 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/metrics/counter.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/metrics/gauge.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/metrics/metric.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/metrics/metrics.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/metrics/metrics.cpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/metrics_tests.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18718/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Added unit tests. make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dominic Hamon
> 
>

Reply via email to