---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31666/#review74919
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [31183, 31664, 31665, 31666]
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31667/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 8:17 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 2:58 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Kapil
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31677/#review74957
---
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31676/
---
Review request for mesos, Joerg Schad, Niklas Nielsen, and Till Toenshoff.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31228/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 12:06 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Joerg Schad,
On March 3, 2015, 6:55 a.m., Timothy Chen wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp, line 2912
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31228/diff/3/?file=882206#file882206line2912
Seems like this is simpler
if (wildcardMatching(endpoint, pattern)) {
match = true;
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31677/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 4:22 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
On March 2, 2015, 8:13 p.m., Timothy Chen wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/fetcher.cpp, line 759
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30774/diff/25/?file=882228#file882228line759
If you're incrementing all the time just to count, why not just get the
size from list?
I am not incrementing
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31228/#review74936
---
Quick fly-by...
3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29289/#review74947
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [31470, 31471, 29288, 31677,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30774/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 5:01 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/#review74978
---
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/net.hpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31470/#review74977
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Dominic Hamon
On March 3, 2015, 3:27 a.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29288/#review74979
---
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29288/#review74981
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Dominic Hamon
On March 3, 2015, 3:28 a.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31677/#review74976
---
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp
Same build issue as here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2362
It's a bug in the cleanup stage of the python artifacts - wonder if it is a
make+parallelism bug
Niklas
On 3 March 2015 at 09:49, Apache Jenkins Server jenk...@builds.apache.org
wrote:
See
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30074/#review75009
---
src/slave/metrics.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31695/
---
Review request for mesos, Niklas Nielsen and Vinod Kone.
Repository: mesos
On March 3, 2015, 10:23 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/master/http.cpp, lines 547-552
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30296/diff/2/?file=882308#file882308line547
Have we informed users about this API breaking change? If not, lets
update the CHANGELOG for 0.22.0 with this change (ask
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31324/#review75017
---
CHANGELOG
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31324/#comment121937
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31250/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 7:37 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Ian Downes.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31699/
---
Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler.
Bugs: MESOS-2353
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31702/
---
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Vinod Kone.
Repository: mesos
On March 3, 2015, 10:23 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/master/http.cpp, lines 547-552
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30296/diff/2/?file=882308#file882308line547
Have we informed users about this API breaking change? If not, lets
update the CHANGELOG for 0.22.0 with this change (ask
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30296/#review74999
---
src/master/http.cpp
On March 3, 2015, 1:08 a.m., Chi Zhang wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp, line 1873
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31505/diff/1/?file=879084#file879084line1873
Any specific reason host traffic has the lowest prioity among these 3?
Yes, to ensure it is
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30612/#review72835
---
src/master/http.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30296/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 11:23 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
On March 3, 2015, 6:17 p.m., Ian Downes wrote:
src/tests/isolator_tests.cpp, lines 607-611
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31250/diff/2/?file=873351#file873351line607
Is the earlier test for pids=[], tids=[] redundant?
CpuIsolator creates a cgroup for the container in ::create, so the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31701/
---
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Vinod Kone.
Repository: mesos
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31700/
---
Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler.
Bugs: MESOS-2353
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30774/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 9:53 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31250/#review74837
---
Ship it!
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/cpushare.cpp
On March 3, 2015, 1:08 a.m., Chi Zhang wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp, line 139
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31505/diff/1/?file=879084#file879084line139
isn't it more like a CONTAINER_FLOWID_BEGIN?
I rename it to CONTAINER_MIN_FLOWID.
- Cong
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31183/#review75011
---
include/mesos/resources.hpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31276/#review75001
---
src/tests/cgroups_tests.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30952/#review75014
---
Ship it!
LGTM. I'll let BenM or Vinod take a look too.
- Jie Yu
I think we did find the issue. It is #1) issue in the comment I made. One
way to fix this would be to s/strftime/os::strftime/ and have both
os::setenv() and os::strftime() be protected by the same lock. But that
seems a bit hacky.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Niklas Nielsen
TL;DR Yep; let's bring a bit more systematic process to this.
On 26 February 2015 at 16:05, Dave Lester d...@davelester.org wrote:
Earlier today, Niklas Nielsen created an initial document to catalog
previous and future Mesos releases:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30774/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 11:40 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/#review74987
---
This is looking good! Thanks for the cleanup!
On March 3, 2015, 6:50 p.m., Ian Downes wrote:
src/tests/cgroups_tests.cpp, lines 1259-1264
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31276/diff/3/?file=876465#file876465line1259
I'm not following how everything is structured here, i.e., the division
between what's done in the helper and
On March 3, 2015, 1:08 a.m., Chi Zhang wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp, line 127
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31505/diff/1/?file=879084#file879084line127
Is it the case that the smaller the number, the higher the priority? If
that's the case,
Thanks!
Joris, mind taking a look in the interim? :)
Niklas
On 25 February 2015 at 17:18, Vinod Kone vinodk...@apache.org wrote:
I'll take a look at, but someone who worked on that code base recently
(joris? benh?) might figure it out sooner than me.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Niklas
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30296/#review75022
---
Ship it!
src/tests/master_tests.cpp
On March 3, 2015, 6:45 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
include/mesos/resources.hpp, lines 301-311
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31183/diff/5/?file=882671#file882671line301
My only concern here is that this could potentially polute the
namespace. What if someone wants to introduce `sum` for
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31538/#review75056
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Isabel Jimenez
On March 3, 2015, 2:24 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31667/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 8:29 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31699/#review75028
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Dominic Hamon
On March 3, 2015, 12:11 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31664/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 8:27 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, line 71
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line71
By convension, if you store an ipv4 address in uint32_t, it should be
in host order. So the code
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, lines 115-126
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line115
I am wondering if this function is necessary given that we implemented
`==` operator. For
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31702/#review75054
---
Why move this test? It seems like we already have a lower level
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31702/#review75053
---
src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31538/#review75062
---
src/slave/slave.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31183/#review75031
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Jie Yu
On March 3, 2015, 8:26 p.m., Michael
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, line 63
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line63
Please be consistent. You use `in_addr` here but you use `struct
in_addr` for the field member.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31183/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 8:26 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
This change has landed in head:
commit d9ba9199a8c8357ab13a1b14f8ee63409c5ac310 (HEAD, origin/master,
origin/HEAD, master)
Author: Dominic Hamon dha...@twitter.com
Commit: Dominic Hamon dha...@twitter.com
Deprecate /stats.json endpoint and supporting code.
Review:
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, lines 454-462
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line454
The code here is a little verbose. I am wondering can we simply this
code by introducing a
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, lines 211-213
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line211
Fix the indent please
Evelina Dumitrescu wrote:
I put the parameters on different lines
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, lines 115-126
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line115
I am wondering if this function is necessary given that we implemented
`==` operator. For
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31700/#review75029
---
do you have a benchmark for before/after?
- Dominic Hamon
On
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, line 260
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line260
Why this function returns a Try? Seems to be uncessary because it
shouldn't fail, right? How about
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, lines 115-126
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line115
I am wondering if this function is necessary given that we implemented
`==` operator. For
On March 3, 2015, 6:39 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/ip.hpp, line 71
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31471/diff/4/?file=882869#file882869line71
By convension, if you store an ipv4 address in uint32_t, it should be
in host order. So the code
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31250/#review75026
---
src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/cpushare.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31665/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 8:28 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31666/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 8:28 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Alexander
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30296/
---
(Updated March 3, 2015, 12:26 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
On March 3, 2015, 8:28 p.m., Dominic Hamon wrote:
do you have a benchmark for before/after?
Not yet. I expect this change to be not worse than the status quo, so the
benchmark is needed to check how much performance have we gained. For more
other approaches we definitely need a set of
See https://builds.apache.org/job/Mesos-Ubuntu-distcheck/710/changes
See
https://builds.apache.org/job/Mesos-Trunk-Ubuntu-Build-Out-Of-Src-Disable-Java-Disable-Python-Disable-Webui/2789/
See https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/4429/
--
[...truncated 5515 lines...]
rm -f usage/.dirstamp
rm -f watcher/.deps/.dirstamp
rm -f watcher/.dirstamp
rm -rf authentication/.libs authentication/_libs
rm -f zookeeper/.deps/.dirstamp
rm -rf
On March 4, 2015, 4:13 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
I think there's value in keeping `JSON::Array` to have the symmetric
interface as `std::vector`.
Currently,
```cpp
JSON::Array array(N);
// array.values.size() == 0
```
The equivalent-looking pattern is deceiving:
On March 3, 2015, 10:37 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp, lines 19-23
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31701/diff/1/?file=883404#file883404line19
Can you put the .h includes first? It looks like we've become
inconsistent on this unfortunately, but it
On Feb. 25, 2015, 2:52 p.m., Dominic Hamon wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os.hpp, line 663
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31441/diff/1/?file=876472#file876472line663
with this, you should be able to test getrdev (the other patch).
please do :)
On March 3, 2015, 6:17 p.m., Ian Downes wrote:
src/tests/isolator_tests.cpp, lines 592-594
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31250/diff/2/?file=873351#file873351line592
Can you use Subprocess::PIPE here so the process will terminate if the
parent exits?
dropped as per discussion
On March 3, 2015, 10:04 p.m., Isabel Jimenez wrote:
Ship It!
Sorry I missed the main issue, see Vinod's comment.
- Isabel
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
On March 2, 2015, 9:36 p.m., Timothy Chen wrote:
docs/mesos-developers-guide.md, line 58
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31638/diff/1/?file=882317#file882317line58
You can actually create a .reviewboardrc that contains your
credentials, then you don't need to login at all.
Cody
See
https://builds.apache.org/job/Mesos-Trunk-Ubuntu-Build-Out-Of-Src-Disable-Java-Disable-Python-Disable-Webui/2788/changes
Changes:
[dhamon] Deprecate /stats.json endpoint and supporting code.
--
[...truncated 2901 lines...]
make[3]: Leaving directory
See https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/4424/changes
Changes:
[dhamon] Deprecate /stats.json endpoint and supporting code.
--
[...truncated 5563 lines...]
rm -f tests/*.o
rm -rf authentication/.libs authentication/_libs
rm -rf
On March 3, 2015, 9:58 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
Why move this test? It seems like we already have a lower level volume
creation validation test inside master_validation_tests.cpp?
Moved to CreateOperationValidationTest.
- Jie
---
On March 3, 2015, 9:57 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp, lines 268-276
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31702/diff/1/?file=883407#file883407line268
Don't you want to make sure that you get back another offer with the
original resources?
Done.
- Jie
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31702/
---
(Updated March 4, 2015, 12:19 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
On March 3, 2015, 10:25 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, line 2519
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31538/diff/3/?file=883016#file883016line2519
shouldn't this be status.state() == TASK_STAGING !?!?
I'm surprised this passed 'make check'!??
This
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31701/#review75069
---
Ship it!
src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31638/
---
(Updated March 4, 2015, 1:18 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Dave Lester.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31250/
---
(Updated March 4, 2015, 1:47 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Ian Downes.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31701/
---
(Updated March 4, 2015, 12:19 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/#review75119
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [27760]
All tests passed.
-
See https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/4425/
On March 4, 2015, 4:13 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
I think there's value in keeping `JSON::Array` to have the symmetric
interface as `std::vector`.
Currently,
```cpp
JSON::Array array(N);
// array.values.size() == 0
```
The equivalent-looking pattern is deceiving:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31699/#review75147
---
I think there's value in keeping `JSON::Array` to have the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31700/#review75150
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [31699, 31700]
All tests
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31667/#review75145
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [31183, 31664, 31665, 31666,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31720/
---
Review request for mesos and Niklas Nielsen.
Bugs: MESOS-2448
Hey Ritwik, please hold off dealing with review comments. The current
approach here still seems to be not quite what we want.
In the current patch, you're speeding up garbage collection globally when
an individual directory has too many child directories. This approach works
fine with disk usage
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
