-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/71315/#review217355
-----------------------------------------------------------



Nice refactor!! Love it


src/tests/master_draining_tests.cpp
Lines 206 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/71315/#comment304643>

    Should we make this value larger? We advance the clock by the agent 
reregistration timeout in these tests, which could be large?



src/tests/master_draining_tests.cpp
Lines 216 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/71315/#comment304644>

    Is this argument ever used?



src/tests/master_draining_tests.cpp
Lines 249 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/71315/#comment304645>

    Do we need to parametrize these by content type? I suspect we have enough 
coverage of the API's handling of different content types elsewhere.


- Greg Mann


On Aug. 19, 2019, 9:55 p.m., Joseph Wu wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/71315/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 19, 2019, 9:55 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benno Evers and Greg Mann.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-9892
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-9892
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Tests of this feature will generally require a master, agent, framework,
> and a single task to be launched at the beginning of the test.
> This moves this common code into the test SetUp.
> 
> This also changes the `post(...)` helper to return the http::Response
> object instead of parsing it.  The response for DRAIN_AGENT calls
> does not return an object, so the tests were not checking the
> response before.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/master_draining_tests.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/71315/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joseph Wu
> 
>

Reply via email to