----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39490/#review107453 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp (lines 2430 - 2432) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/39490/#comment166560> Please move this comments down (to where you increment the metrics) src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp (line 2450) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/39490/#comment166557> Let's not increment this metrics. Otherwise, you'll have this metrics being increased everytime a new container is launched. Instead, Please just add a comment and ignore this case. src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp (line 2469) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/39490/#comment166558> Ditto here. - Jie Yu On Nov. 20, 2015, 11:36 p.m., Cong Wang wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/39490/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 20, 2015, 11:36 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Ian Downes and Jie Yu. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > When rolling out the new flag --egress_unique_flow_per_container, I noticed, > on some slaves, only IP egress filters were created as expected, the reset > were not. Looking at the code, it looks like we skipped the creation if this > is not the first container we create, this is wrong for this case, because > egress filters were not created for previous containers yet. We should always > create them and ignore error if they exist. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp > e50616fd609588c547c90bba6d7b3b9b3eb4c6a9 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39490/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Manual tests > > > Thanks, > > Cong Wang > >
