Hi, all:
I am using mesos-0.22.0, I noticed that FrameworkToExecutorMessage is sent
along path:
Scheduler->Master->Slave->Executor,
while ExecutorToFrameworkMessage is sent along path:
Executor->Slave->Scheduler,
So is there some reason or benefit for bypassing master while transmitting
ExecutorToFrameworkMessage?
One more question, FrameworkToExecutorMessage and ExecutorToFrameworkMessage
are instantiated in function SendFrameworkMessage, declaration of
SendFrameworkMessage in include/mesos/scheduler.hpp and
include/mesos/executor.hpp:
// Sends a message from the framework to one of its executors. These
// messages are best effort; do not expect a framework message to be
// retransmitted in any reliable fashion.
virtual Status sendFrameworkMessage(
const ExecutorID& executorId,
const SlaveID& slaveId,
const std::string& data) = 0;
I guess that protobuf message are transmitted with TCP, so does this comment
mean I have to guarantee reliability by myself even with TCP? What's special
for these
two messages compared with other protobuf messages, If no, do we have to
guarantee reliability all by ourselves?
Thank you very much and best regards !
