/modules.md
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33372/#comment131393
I still think we need a note in upgrades.md since this is a hook API change
when upgrading.
- Adam B
On April 21, 2015, 1:13 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote
didn't have these in 0.21 right?
After (0.23.0+)
- Adam B
On April 20, 2015, 2:27 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33372
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31016/#review80820
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On April 20, 2015, 1:44 p.m., Niklas
://reviews.apache.org/r/31028/#comment130932
Would be great to see a diagram of these labels coming and going at
different points in the runTask lifecycle. It's a little confusing keeping
track of what happens when. New documentation JIRA?
- Adam B
On April 20, 2015, 1:17 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31017/#review80829
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On April 20, 2015, 1:17 p.m., Niklas
the expectation/future before them.
- Adam B
On April 20, 2015, 1:17 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32948
On April 13, 2015, 10:20 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/tests/fetcher_tests.cpp, line 708
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32975/diff/3/?file=925449#file925449line708
s/archive/archived/ ?
Jim Klucar wrote:
fixed as suggested
Jim, you claim that you've fixed these issues, but I
On April 19, 2015, 11:27 p.m., Adam B wrote:
src/cli/execute.cpp, line 77
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33109/diff/2/?file=924729#file924729line77
Any reason not to just name this 'env' or 'environment'?
haosdent huang wrote:
I afraid environment/env maybe have other usage
. (Also assuming you
didn't lie about changing any logic/functionality. ;)
- Adam B
On April 14, 2015, 5:44 p.m., Till Toenshoff wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32850
?
Probably need to choose another delimiter (even `;` and `=` could be
tricky), or pass in a newline-delimited file, or go all the way to json lists.
- Adam B
On April 13, 2015, 9:42 a.m., haosdent huang wrote
nobody objects in the
meantime).
- Adam B
On April 19, 2015, 11:53 p.m., haosdent huang wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32693
On April 11, 2015, 3:54 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/examples/test_hook_module.cpp, lines 80-85
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31028/diff/4/?file=920382#file920382line80
Create variables like testLabelKey, etc. above so it's easier to track
all these label k/v strings.
Niklas Nielsen
On April 11, 2015, 3:26 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, lines 1186-1188
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31016/diff/4/?file=920381#file920381line1186
What makes this the ideal place to do the label decoration? Looks like
this is wedged between setting up different unschedule
another
committer take a look before we commit it.
src/sched/sched.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33208/#comment130787
I wonder if we need to wait for SchedulerProcess::stop to complete before
deleting the detector, or if we could even delete the detector first.
- Adam B
On April 14
On April 8, 2015, 5:31 p.m., Adam B wrote:
src/examples/test_hook_module.cpp, line 36
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961/diff/7/?file=920371#file920371line36
Unused? Or should you check that the value being removed is what you
expect?
Niklas Nielsen wrote:
It was just
On April 19, 2015, 10:55 p.m., Adam B wrote:
LGTM, barring a question about ordering/synchronization. I'll let another
committer take a look before we commit it.
Would also like to see a successful ReviewBot pass. That MasterFailover
segfault seems like it could be related to your
, but will try to
review asap. Maybe others can make a pass sooner.
- Adam B
On April 13, 2015, 9:42 a.m., haosdent huang wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33109
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32586/#review79800
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On April 7, 2015, 9:59 a.m., Kapil
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32583/#review79798
---
Ship it!
Did you ever (manually?) Test for upgrade path?
- Adam B
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32585/#review79799
---
Ship it!
Needs a quick rebase before committing.
- Adam B
On April 7, 2015, 1:41 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/hook/manager.cpp, line 104
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961/diff/6/?file=914058#file914058line104
Would it make sense to make taskInfo a pass-by-value param, forcing the
copy at the call?
Niklas Nielsen wrote
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30962/#review79802
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On April 7, 2015, 5:57 p.m., Niklas
after (or before?) the
pid/id/state checks; or, if we need to delay it, we could do it after the
unschedules.
- Adam B
On April 11, 2015, 3:03 a.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit
/31028/#comment129387
Create variables like testLabelKey, etc. above so it's easier to track all
these label k/v strings.
src/tests/hook_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31028/#comment129388
Why this change? What's wrong with the TestContainerizer?
- Adam B
On April 11, 2015, 3
://reviews.apache.org/r/32998/#comment128854
s/scope of the work be reduced/scope of the work should be reduced/
- Adam B
On April 8, 2015, 5:30 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit
, but this is a great start.
docs/engineering-principles-and-practices.md
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32999/#comment128857
s/allows us identify/allows us to identify/
s/allows to iterate/allows us to iterate/
- Adam B
On April 8, 2015, 5:30 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote
label shadows label? Maybe oldLabel/newLabel? Then you can also reuse the
`Label*` in line 52 and 59 (`label_`)
- Adam B
On April 7, 2015, 5:57 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit
);`
- Adam B
On April 2, 2015, 2:39 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32585/#comment128281
`const FrameworkID`?
- Adam B
On April 1, 2015, 12:34 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32585
On March 30, 2015, 3:23 a.m., Adam B wrote:
Minor cleanup/suggestions, but otherwise good. We'll definitely need to
document te module(-manager) API change of overriding the label set instead
of merging. This should probably go in the upgrades doc?
Niklas Nielsen wrote:
Thanks
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32583/#comment128276
Is this another instance where we're taking a const reference of a
temporary?
https://gist.github.com/jmlvanre/8a3de53ae88c2d19b375
- Adam B
On April 3, 2015, 7:05 a.m., Kapil Arya wrote
/#comment128282
Const ref of a temporary?
src/tests/mesos.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32586/#comment128283
Why this change?
- Adam B
On April 1, 2015, 12:35 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail
CopyFrom
src/tests/hook_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31028/#comment128296
s/remove/removed/
src/tests/hook_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31028/#comment128297
One which will... and the other...? Unclear what the second label is for
(testing add)
- Adam B
suggested an alternate
wording, but am fine with this either way.
bin/gdb-mesos-local.sh.in
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32834/#comment128001
Alternate wording: Generated libtool doesn't appear to support gdb, or gdb
is not installed.
- Adam B
On April 3, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Timothy Chen wrote
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32832/#review78851
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On April 3, 2015, 3:58 p.m., Niklas
On Feb. 18, 2015, 11:38 a.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
Let's get tests wired up before committing this :)
Adam B wrote:
Sure thing. Adding tests in my subsequent patch where we will pass the
master's timeout values on to the slave. Will post that very soon.
Ben Mahler wrote
?
- Adam B
On March 31, 2015, 1:28 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32583/
---
(Updated March 31
, ensuring that
Slave::Framework::info.id is set, and thus Archive::Framework::framework_info
has the frameworkId.
- Adam B
On March 31, 2015, 1:29 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit
On March 27, 2015, 2:17 a.m., Adam B wrote:
docs/upgrades.md, line 15
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32543/diff/2/?file=907124#file907124line15
Is there some new behavior in Mesos 0.22 that just caused this issue to
start occurring? Or could this have happened with Mesos 0.21
On March 27, 2015, 2:17 a.m., Adam B wrote:
docs/slave-recovery.md, line 71
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32543/diff/2/?file=907123#file907123line71
(If the slave does not come back, each executorDriver shuts itself down
after $MESOS_RECOVERY_TIMEOUT.)
Important
On April 1, 2015, 2:28 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, line 1043
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32585/diff/1-2/?file=908253#file908253line1043
Hmm... I was actually thinking that this line of code can be removed
now that you're always filling in the id in the FrameworkInfo
/libprocess/src/process.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31228/#comment127457
Since disabledHttpEndpoints is a hashset, couldn't you just use contains()?
- Adam B
On April 1, 2015, 2:50 a.m., Alexander Rojas wrote
of using the wrong taskInfo in future nearby calls.
And another +1 to renaming this `task` to prevent accidental use of the
const parameter (rename it `task_`) instead of the actively modified taskInfo.
- Adam B
On March 13, 2015, 4:04 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote
(result.get());`
and then it's clear throughout that you're modifying the same `taskInfo_`
object.
src/tests/hook_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30961/#comment126701
Switch Key, Value
- Adam B
On March 13, 2015, 4:04 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote
/#comment126703
And if (result.isNone()), is that really supposed to mean that this hook
didn't want to modify the env, so the HookManager can leave the environment as
is and move onto the next hook? If so, it's probably worth a comment, if not a
LOG(INFO).
- Adam B
On March 13, 2015, 4:04 p.m
On Feb. 18, 2015, 11:38 a.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
Let's get tests wired up before committing this :)
Adam B wrote:
Sure thing. Adding tests in my subsequent patch where we will pass the
master's timeout values on to the slave. Will post that very soon.
Ben Mahler wrote
. 19, 2015, 12:10 a.m., Adam B wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29507/
---
(Updated Feb. 19, 2015, 12:10 a.m
? Or could this have happened with Mesos 0.21 or earlier with
the same systemd default setting? If so, this is not an upgrade issue and
this note doesn't belong in the upgrades doc.
- Adam B
On March 26, 2015, 4:53 p.m., Joerg Schad wrote
. ;)
- Adam B
On March 25, 2015, 4:35 p.m., Till Toenshoff wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/
---
(Updated March 25
/
---
(Updated March 19, 2015, 8:52 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Cody Maloney, and Till Toenshoff.
Bugs: MESOS-2375
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2375
Repository: mesos
Description
---
As a number of tests rely on the checkpointing
On March 18, 2015, 11:04 p.m., Adam B wrote:
(Sorry, pulled the trigger early; meant to click Save instead. More coming..)
- Adam
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31539
://reviews.apache.org/r/31539/#comment124787
Nit: s/ // or is that coming in a separate review?
- Adam B
On March 18, 2015, 2:43 p.m., Joerg Schad wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r
the same
work_dir.?
src/tests/master_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31539/#comment124799
Style: Comments wrap at 70 chars.
src/tests/master_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31539/#comment124801
Is this needed for its work_dir?
- Adam B
On March 18, 2015, 2:43 p.m
, if nobody else has any
objections.
src/tests/fault_tolerance_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31539/#comment124851
No need to call it a checkpointing slave, since all slaves are
checkpointing now.
- Adam B
On March 19, 2015, 8:52 a.m., Joerg Schad wrote
On March 19, 2015, 9:33 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/tests/fault_tolerance_tests.cpp, line 123
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31539/diff/7-8/?file=899402#file899402line123
No need to call it a checkpointing slave, since all slaves are
checkpointing now.
Joerg Schad wrote:
Till
On March 15, 2015, 2:03 a.m., Adam B wrote:
include/mesos/mesos.proto, lines 321-323
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31539/diff/5/?file=894980#file894980line321
Will we be able to remove this flag in 0.23, or will we need to wait
for another release cycle for deprecation? Seems like
On March 16, 2015, 3:40 p.m., Adam B wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, lines 2490-2491
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32130/diff/1/?file=896443#file896443line2490
Why not just use update.mutable_status() instead of making a copy of
the StatusUpdate object? We do this in several other
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32130/#review76687
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On March 16, 2015, 4:06 p.m
();`
- Adam B
On March 14, 2015, 7:10 a.m., Joerg Schad wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31539/
---
(Updated
/r/31539/
---
(Updated March 14, 2015, 7:10 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Cody Maloney, and Till Toenshoff.
Bugs: MESOS-2375
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2375
Repository: mesos
Description
/ in the rb description.
- Adam B
On March 13, 2015, 12:55 p.m., Cody Maloney wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32008
with this patch?
src/tests/master_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31977/#comment123701
I found a couple other MATCHERs in
3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/gmock.hpp
- Adam B
On March 12, 2015, 12:53 a.m., Michael Park wrote
On March 11, 2015, 1:02 a.m., Adam B wrote:
src/tests/hook_tests.cpp, line 199
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31889/diff/6/?file=891026#file891026line199
Does this being a HookTest mean that it's guaranteed to use the
FOO=bar test executorEnvironmentDecorator hook?
Kapil Arya
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31889/#review76172
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On March 11, 2015, 4:42 p.m., Kapil
() + LaunchTasks() model instead of
building up a TaskInfo yourself.
- Adam B
On March 10, 2015, 7:15 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31889
?
CHANGELOG
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31324/#comment123688
Similarly, do we want to call out the new Accept(offerIds, Operation) API,
or wait until DiskInfo/DynamicReservations are ready before we try and push
people off of the old LaunchTasks API?
- Adam B
On March 11, 2015, 5:28 p.m
/to be
passed//
- Adam B
On March 11, 2015, 3:51 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31889
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31961/#review76205
---
Ship it!
LGTM
- Adam B
On March 11, 2015, 5:02 p.m., Till
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31960/#review76206
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On March 11, 2015, 4:06 p.m., Till
:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/
---
(Updated March 11, 2015, 5:32 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Kapil Arya, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone
to prepend/append when creating a
variable's new value.
- Adam B
On March 10, 2015, 6:11 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31889
for this
behavior?
- Adam B
On March 8, 2015, 5:54 p.m., Till Toenshoff wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31838
()) {
LOG(WARNING) Authentication for pid
has pending cancel request;
} else if (authenticate.discard()) {
LOG(WARNING) Requested to cancel authentication for pid;
}
```
Adam B wrote:
How about: Tried to cancel
/develop/development/
CHANGELOG
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31324/#comment122302
Sort
CHANGELOG
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31324/#comment122303
Sort
- Adam B
On March 4, 2015, 3:08 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote
for mesos, Adam B, Kapil Arya, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone.
Bugs: MESOS-2050
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2050
Repository: mesos
Description
---
The initial design and implementation of the authenticator module interface
caused issues and was not optimal
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31362/#review74250
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Adam B
On Feb. 26, 2015, 12:16 a.m., Bernd
On Feb. 26, 2015, 2:01 a.m., Adam B wrote:
Ship It!
Niklas Nielsen wrote:
What happened here? This is blocking 0.22.0. Bernd, are you on top of the
flaky test?
Adam B wrote:
The latest revision (4) fixed the broken test by writing the script into
the tests tmpdir rather
On Feb. 25, 2015, 11:08 a.m., Adam B wrote:
Minor markdown tweaks, but I'll fix those myself and commit this.
Submitted.
- Adam
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31390
and commit this.
docs/app-framework-development-guide.md
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31390/#comment120554
s/`location field`/`location` field/
docs/app-framework-development-guide.md
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31390/#comment120564
s/name field/`name` field/
- Adam B
On Feb. 25, 2015, 9
On Feb. 25, 2015, 11:08 a.m., Adam B wrote:
Minor markdown tweaks, but I'll fix those myself and commit this.
Adam B wrote:
Submitted.
Ben Mahler wrote:
Adam: Did you forget to mark this review as submitted?
Unfortunately, I don't have permission to mark others reviews
] FetcherTest.HdfsURI (0 ms)
Have you investigated this failure?
- Adam B
On Feb. 25, 2015, 1:27 a.m., Bernd Mathiske wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31362
JIRAs
- Adam B
On Feb. 24, 2015, 5:08 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31324
into it can/will go directly to the protobuf
definitions anyway.
docs/app-framework-development-guide.md
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31390/#comment120435
Do you really need to include this lengthy comment if you're copying its
contents below? Once is enough. Your choice which one.
- Adam B
On Feb. 23, 2015, 2:02 p.m., Michael Park wrote:
CHANGELOG, line 156
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31324/diff/1/?file=873132#file873132line156
This one was reverted, we're going to use ACLs and principals instead
to achieve this. Let's keep it out.
Reopened and removed 0.22 Fixed
Maybe note that frameworks must still enable it in their frameworkInfo to
take advantage of checkpointing their tasks.
- Adam B
On Feb. 23, 2015, 1:33 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail
because it
is inline in the description. Either way is fine by me, but please be
consistent between the two.
- Adam B
On Feb. 23, 2015, 3:12 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https
/#comment120256
Might you want to use '' instead of ';', in case the fake fetcher 'cp'
fails?
src/tests/fetcher_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31362/#comment120257
Very cool. Did you (manually) test that this actually works?
- Adam B
On Feb. 24, 2015, 9:28 a.m., Bernd Mathiske
a fork of
Mesos under https://github.com/kozyraki
That'll make this much easier to read/review. Thanks.
- Adam B
On Feb. 24, 2015, 9:38 p.m., Christos Kozyrakis wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit
://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/#comment119782
Maybe do a `CHECK_SOME(authenticator)`?
src/master/master.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/#comment119783
s/hinting/indicating/, since it's stronger than a hint.
s/gotten refused/been refused/
- Adam B
On Feb. 21, 2015, 2:16 p.m
/
---
(Updated Feb. 19, 2015, 6:02 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Adam B, Kapil Arya, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone.
Bugs: MESOS-2050
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2050
Repository: mesos
Description
---
The initial design
timeouts.
`make check` with new unit tests: ShortPingTimeoutUnreachableMaster and
ShortPingTimeoutUnreachableSlave
Thanks,
Adam B
On Feb. 18, 2015, 11:38 a.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
Let's get tests wired up before committing this :)
Adam B wrote:
Sure thing. Adding tests in my subsequent patch where we will pass the
master's timeout values on to the slave. Will post that very soon.
Ben Mahler wrote
separate endpoint that browse or
/browse route to?
src/tests/files_tests.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30995/#comment119053
s/permission/access/?
hashsetstring
- Adam B
On Feb. 13, 2015, 7:59 a.m., Alexander Rojas wrote
On Feb. 16, 2015, 11:37 p.m., Adam B wrote:
src/authentication/cram_md5/authenticator.hpp, line 533
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/diff/14/?file=863170#file863170line533
Should this still `process::terminate(process, false)` if the short
term fix is now
into a retry loop?
Adam B wrote:
Truth. There is a TODO about at least adding a backoff, but maybe we
should also attempt registering without authentication?
Maybe authentication shouldn't even cause retries under certain scenarios
where it will never eventually succeed (bad
the Process refers to, and what
authentication modifies. Or is Process intended as a verb? Much too
overloaded here.
src/authentication/cram_md5/authenticator.cpp
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27760/#comment119073
Authentication session already active...?
- Adam B
On Feb. 17, 2015, 7:57
and boostcompute dependencies). A module would also be cleaner than
#ifdef'ing out big chunks of code.
- Adam B
On Feb. 6, 2015, 9:33 a.m., chester kuo wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29507/#review72992
---
On Jan. 8, 2015, 12:44 a.m., Adam B wrote
and --max_slave_ping_timeouts.
Ran unit tests with shorter non-default values for ping timeouts.
Thanks,
Adam B
per-endpoint fields. What do you think?
- Adam B
On Feb. 13, 2015, 8:02 a.m., Alexander Rojas wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30996
1 - 100 of 536 matches
Mail list logo
