> On March 15, 2019, 2:40 a.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > src/slave/slave.cpp > > Lines 2991 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/70084/diff/1/?file=2128192#file2128192line2991> > > > > We have an implicit constructor from repeated resource. Can we get rid > > of the explicit construction here?
Unfortunately no since both `executorInfo.resources()` and `task->resources()` are both `RepeatedPtrField<Resource>`, no `operator+` is defined for it. Dropping. > On March 15, 2019, 2:40 a.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > src/slave/slave.cpp > > Lines 2998 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/70084/diff/1/?file=2128192#file2128192line2998> > > > > lets use the new `*` operator: > > `... = *(flags.default_container_info);` It seems that we don't need the parentheses ;) Will do. BTW is `operator*` backported to 1.7? > On March 15, 2019, 2:40 a.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > src/slave/slave.cpp > > Lines 3001 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/70084/diff/1/?file=2128192#file2128192line3001> > > > > `publishResources` are put ahead of the other calls. > > I guess the simplicity outweights the performance concern of wasted > > work. > > > > As one with limited knowledge of this part of the code, I was wondering > > if we need any cleanup of the `publishResources` in case something goes ary > > in between. Not in this patch, but adding some comments regarding the > > cleanup and idempotency of the call would be great. There are comments in `publishResources` but I'll copy them over here and other callsites as well. > On March 15, 2019, 2:40 a.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > src/slave/slave.cpp > > Line 2978 (original), 3014 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/70084/diff/1/?file=2128192#file2128192line3014> > > > > I see that this is equivalent to the original logic, but brevity makes > > it harder to grasp. A comment regarding taskGroup would be appreaciated. Can you elaborated more on what should be clarified? - Chun-Hung ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/70084/#review213740 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 2, 2019, 1:04 a.m., Chun-Hung Hsiao wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/70084/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 2, 2019, 1:04 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Gilbert Song, Greg Mann, Jie Yu, Meng Zhu, and > Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-8467 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-8467 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > When launching executors and tasks, there is no guarantee that the > executors still remain after `Slave::publishResources` is returned. If > not, the executor struct should not be dereferenced and the executor > containers should not be launched at all. > > NOTE: The patch makes `Slave::launchExecutor` called asynchronously even > if there is no secret generator. However this should not affect the > correctness of executor launching. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/slave.hpp 7ad495504e4ff144ac31812fbd4a3a1f4da86f02 > src/slave/slave.cpp e3c2c005d865b5c333e92e50e49ef398fe06ad79 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/70084/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > sudo make check > > > Thanks, > > Chun-Hung Hsiao > >
