> On Sept. 10, 2015, 12:58 p.m., Guangya Liu wrote: > > src/slave/slave.cpp, line 4373 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38253/diff/1/?file=1067133#file1067133line4373> > > > > I think that you are still killing executor, what about update as > > following: > > > > Kill executor [id] with containerid [id] for framework [id] as QoS > > correction?
Both executor & container are killed, so I specified it as container. - Klaus ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38253/#review98393 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 15, 2015, 1:08 p.m., Klaus Ma wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/38253/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 15, 2015, 1:08 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Niklas Nielsen. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2875 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2875 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > We should ensure that we are addressing the container which the QoS > controller intended to kill. Without this check, we may run into a scenario > where the executor has terminated and one with the same id has started in the > interim i.e. running in a different container than the one the QoS controller > targeted. > > This most likely requires us to add containerId to the ResourceUsage message > and encode the containerID in the QoS Correction message. > > > Diffs > ----- > > include/mesos/mesos.proto b1deed4 > include/mesos/slave/oversubscription.proto fa69a95 > src/slave/slave.cpp 44865bd > src/tests/oversubscription_tests.cpp 0c5edaf > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38253/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make > make check > > > Thanks, > > Klaus Ma > >
