> On March 17, 2015, 5:59 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > > > Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > Vinod, we can avoid all these dances if we pass update by value. I would > prefer this approach, but it's with our codebase, therefore I went for a > copy. What do you think?
SGTM - Vinod ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32130/#review76750 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 16, 2015, 11:06 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/32130/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 16, 2015, 11:06 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Niklas Nielsen and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2499 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2499 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > A status update originating from executor should have the TaskStatus::source > field set to TaskStatus::SOURCE_EXECUTOR. Set this field in the slave to be > future proof (a future where there will be no executor driver). Previous code > has a bug and updated a copy of the update that was not forwarded. Add some > checks for source and reason for status updates in existing tests. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/slave.cpp 0f99e4efb8fa2b96f120a3e49191158ca0364c06 > src/tests/slave_tests.cpp a975305430097a8295b4b155e8448572c12bde22 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32130/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check (Mac OS 10.9.5, CentOS 7.0.1406) > > > Thanks, > > Alexander Rukletsov > >
