Re: .gitignore-template

It certainly is not unwittingly unless you are one of those who do `git yolo` and we should really discourage such dangerous way of writing patches. Once you do git status you will notice there is something wrong with the template. That being said, +1 to add this to the documentation. These

Re: JIRA Shepherds

This reminds me the article I read several days ago. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/code-reviews-me-pi-chuan-chang It mentioned that these may make the code review going to bad: > * Don't: Drag on forever; instead: set a meeting to talk in person > * Don't: over engineer on insignificant details

Re: .gitignore-template

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Alexander Rojas wrote: > It certainly is not unwittingly unless you are one of those who do `git > yolo` and we should really discourage such dangerous way of writing patches. ​The "unwittingly" was referred to modifying a file that is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.27.0 (rc2)

+1 (binding) Tested on Ubuntu 15.04: - Built with clang-3.6 and gcc-4.8. - Launched 1K agents. - Launched 100K tasks (slowly) on 100 agents. - Validated virtual memory set did not grow. - Validate UI was responsive. - Validate task recovery with 0.26 Master -> 0.27

Re: [Discussion] MESOS-4442: `allocated` may have more resources then `total` in allocator

Copy that; thanks :). On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 5:04 AM Benjamin Mahler wrote: > Looks like you've seen the comment here: > >

Re: Need a shepherd for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4446

+tim, jie since this is docker related On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Abhishek Dasgupta < a10gu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Is there someone who can please shepherd the issue > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4446? > We can have a discussion on designing this on the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.27.0 (rc2)

Thanks, buddy - I keep forgetting that one! (one assumes --all would, well, take care of that too :) Have a great weekend! -- *Marco Massenzio* http://codetrips.com On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:06 PM, Vinod Kone wrote: > Git fetch --tags > > @vinodkone > > On Jan 29, 2016,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.27.0 (rc2)

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Marco Massenzio wrote: > Is there a 0.27.0-rc2 branch cut? > > $ git fetch --all > Fetching origin > > $ git co 0.27.0-rc2 > error: pathspec '0.27.0-rc2' did not match any file(s) known to git. > > ​well, or a tag, for that matter... $ git

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.27.0 (rc2)

Is there a 0.27.0-rc2 branch cut? $ git fetch --all Fetching origin $ git co 0.27.0-rc2 error: pathspec '0.27.0-rc2' did not match any file(s) known to git. -- *Marco Massenzio* http://codetrips.com On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Michael Park wrote: > Hi all, > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.27.0 (rc2)

+1 (binding) Tested (non-root tests with ./support/docker_build.sh script) on ASF CI with the following configurations: NOTE: clang is intentionally disabled on centos and "clang + ubuntu + --verbose" build failed because of a

Re: Core affinity in Mesos

Since "Isolation" applies broadly outside of the context of addressing latency sensitive workloads (e.g. user/pid/network namespacing, resource limitations (e.g. cpu quota, memory limits, gpu device visibility) it would be great to choose a more specific name. Some suggestions: interference,

Re: Core affinity in Mesos

I agree. "Isolation" on it's own is too broad a term. However, since we are talking mostly about reducing interference, which typically implies performance isolation, my vote for the group name is the "Performance Isolation Working Group". On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Benjamin Mahler

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.27.0 (rc2)

[+1] (non-binding) I tested on Ubuntu 12.04 and OSX 10.10.5 without SSL. *make check* works on both platforms with no issues. With *sudo make check *some tests fail. The ubuntu failure also occurs with other tests and seems to be related to the cgroups configuration on that system. Currently

Re: Need a shepherd for MESOS--3317

IMO there is not enough information in the ticket and review to understand why this is being done. The only information I see is: "A well defined query string order (e.g. in alphabetical order) may be important for bot detection." Could we please clarify what problem is being solved here? On

Re: Shepherd request

If some contributors can help review, I would be happy to get this committed for you. On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Disha Singh wrote: > Can anyone be the shepherd for : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3161 > > I would need help in inserting proper

RE: Core affinity in Mesos

On the similar lines, Interference-aware scheduling could be one of the desired capabilities from a Resource Manager like Mesos. This essentially is tied into the fact that all data centers/nodes are not really homogeneous. Typically, it is assumed that all placement choices are equally good.

Re: [Discussion] MESOS-4442: `allocated` may have more resources then `total` in allocator

Looks like you've seen the comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4442?focusedCommentId=15120754=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15120754 We allow this so that the allocator can be over-allocated. When over-allocated, we will not

Re: IPv6 support in Mesos

I would love to see IPv6 support in Mesos for both the executor and scheduler APIs, as well as the master and slave IPC. Does Yandex need support for all of these across the board, or are you primarily looking to enable containers with IPv6? Given the nature of IPv6 auto-configuration, it's likely

Re: IPv6 support in Mesos

I've un-assigned and removed the shepherd on this, no work has taken place for some time. Glad to see you're using Mesos! There is currently no shepherd for IPv6 support, but it would be great if you could publish a design document for feedback after you've assessed what needs to be done to