> On Nov. 5, 2014, 11:50 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > src/slave/slave.cpp, lines 1195-1200 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/27567/diff/1/?file=748326#file748326line1195> > > > > A comment here as to why we don't need to send TASK_LOST would be much > > appreciated! It's not obvious so someone might come along and add a > > TASK_LOST to make sure we're not dropping the task on the floor, so context > > here would be great!
Hah, thanks for sharing - I am not alone! :-) None of this was obvious to me either, because there is no comment explaining the general life cycle of anything. Once you understand the intended life cycle, there is now way there can be a TASK_LOST situation here, though. Therefore I propose adding comments describing the overall picture regarding frameworks, executor IDs and task creation in the appropriate places, instead. I'll file a ticket if you agree. - Bernd ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/27567/#review60016 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Nov. 4, 2014, 3:46 p.m., Bernd Mathiske wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/27567/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 4, 2014, 3:46 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2038 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2038 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > Removed a few lines of dead code that coverty discovered. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/slave.cpp 5e9b0e4f93a5100a91340e1f6fb1fe160b2eea4b > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/27567/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > none. > expecting/waiting for review bot to report no problem. > > > Thanks, > > Bernd Mathiske > >
