Re: [1/6] mesos git commit: Fixed a memory leak in the scheduler driver.

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Neil Conway wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Benjamin Mahler > wrote: > > Yikes! (3) being not true to me means that I needed non-local reasoning > to > > determine the optionality. > > Sorry: to clarify, I

Re: [1/6] mesos git commit: Fixed a memory leak in the scheduler driver.

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Benjamin Mahler wrote: > Yikes! (3) being not true to me means that I needed non-local reasoning to > determine the optionality. Sorry: to clarify, I didn't mean "there is not always a latch" in the code in question. I meant: "writing 'delete

[Mesos Allocation Workgroup] Quota update design doc

Hi dev and allocation work group, I'm working on MESOS-4941: Support updating existing quota and I'd like to share the design doc for review upon request of shepherds. Thanks. --

Re: [1/6] mesos git commit: Fixed a memory leak in the scheduler driver.

Yikes! (3) being not true to me means that I needed non-local reasoning to determine the optionality. I reason about symmetric operations like new/delete in a similar way to other symmetric operations like open/close. Even though close(-1) returns EBADF and doesn't do something bad, it's

Re: [1/6] mesos git commit: Fixed a memory leak in the scheduler driver.

(3) is not true, though: as written, there may or may not be a latch (the code works correctly correct either way). Using an operation (delete) that works fine for null pointers as a way to imply that a pointer is NOT null does not seem like the best arrangement. As you say, there should be

Re: [1/6] mesos git commit: Fixed a memory leak in the scheduler driver.

I'm not sure the null check was in place for the safety of deletion so much as to make the code easier to reason about: if (process != NULL) { terminate(process); wait(process); delete process; } if (credential != NULL) { delete credential; } delete latch; Here, (1)

Re: Compute event at Twitter HQ - 03/31

Hello everyone, The talks will indeed be recorded and made available on Twitter's YouTube channel. I will send an update after the event when the videos have been uploaded. Ian On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Micheal Benedict Arul wrote: > We won't be streaming

Re: Build Mesos on Windows

>Microsoft is putting on their annual developer conference, "//build", Do you mean [Bash is coming to Windows]( http://techcrunch.com/2016/03/30/be-very-afraid-hell-has-frozen-over-bash-is-coming-to-windows-10/ )? On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Alex Clemmer

Re: Ordering guarantee of future.onAny callbacks

I think the API of future intuitively suggests parts of the chain will execute in a specific order. The type system even enforces some of these IIUC. For example: func().then([](T) -> X {...}).repair([](Future) -> X {...}).then([](X) -> Y {...}).onAny([](Future){...}) As you can see, the