> On July 30, 2015, 5:03 a.m., Adam B wrote: > > src/slave/slave.cpp, line 1240 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/32587/diff/5/?file=1023551#file1023551line1240> > > > > Maybe not a CHECK, since that would kill the slave. How about just > > logging an error and, if you're feeling generous, maybe sending back > > TASK_LOST?
A TASK_LOST message would require a framework-id, so just ignoring the runTask message and logging an error instead. - Kapil ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32587/#review93560 ----------------------------------------------------------- On July 30, 2015, 12:18 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/32587/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 30, 2015, 12:18 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Adam B and Niklas Nielsen. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2559 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2559 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > FrameworkID can be retrieved from RunTaskMessage.framework. > > NOTE: This patch is only to be merged _ONLY_ after all the dependent patches > have shipped, i.e. after 0.23.0 (tracked here: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2561) has released. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/master/master.cpp a8a195df07b5a97fdba7dfc5f312bbfa85a0d510 > src/slave/slave.cpp f91fa9204cd89596a3690c55c22e93429392cbfd > src/tests/mesos.cpp f3b731542f9db4f966970ecb2bb96eb828350dea > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32587/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > Also ran Nik's test-upgrade.py script (https://reviews.apache.org/r/31645) > with 0.23.0 and the current master to verify compatibility checks. > > > Thanks, > > Kapil Arya > >
