---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 2:31 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
Hi all,
I'm working on MESOS-1416 (mesos-0.19.0 build directory is read-only), so i'd
like to know the steps to reproduce it. Can anyone help me?
Regards,Da Ma (马达), PMP® | CEL3 Team LeadPlatform Symphony MapReduce
Development Support, STG, IBM GCG+86-10-8245 4084 | mad...@cn.ibm.com |
On Oct. 8, 2014, 1:17 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
src/module/manager.hpp, lines 95-105
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/diff/17/?file=714903#file714903line95
I would suggest changing these to be static functions that return
static singletons as per
Just as a note, here's the JIRA ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1046
On 6 October 2014 13:54, Dominic Hamon dha...@twopensource.com wrote:
Hello
I think this is correctly observed, and I'm surprised that it hasn't yet
bitten us given our propensity for short names and use
On Oct. 6, 2014, 10:02 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/reap.cpp, lines 124-127
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26229/diff/1/?file=710088#file710088line124
Why do you need a variable for this? Can't this just be a 'return'
statement?
If there's a reason
On Oct. 7, 2014, 9:46 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
I'm curious why you need to expose both sides of the bounds? Our tests
currently hard-code 1 second as the reap interval, and since Ian did not
change the maximum, the tests continue to function as expected.
Are you planning to follow
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26229/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 9:30 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26436/#review55772
---
src/slave/containerizer/docker.cpp
On Oct. 6, 2014, 10:02 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/reap.cpp, lines 124-127
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26229/diff/1/?file=710088#file710088line124
Why do you need a variable for this? Can't this just be a 'return'
statement?
If there's a reason
On Oct. 6, 2014, 10:02 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/reap.cpp, lines 124-127
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26229/diff/1/?file=710088#file710088line124
Why do you need a variable for this? Can't this just be a 'return'
statement?
If there's a reason
On Oct. 7, 2014, 10:38 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
I don't see any changes in the diff? Bad diff?
Sorry, git pilot error. Will re-post.
- Bernd
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26229/#review55779
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [26229]
All tests passed.
-
On Oct. 7, 2014, 11:22 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
src/slave/slave.cpp, lines 1354-1356
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23912/diff/6/?file=714590#file714590line1354
It looks like `taskMap.erase(taskId)` needs to modify the
`framework-pending` hashmap. I think we want `foreachvalue
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23912/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 3:57 a.m.)
Review request for mesos.
Changes
---
On Oct. 6, 2014, 10:02 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/reap.cpp, lines 124-127
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26229/diff/1/?file=710088#file710088line124
Why do you need a variable for this? Can't this just be a 'return'
statement?
If there's a reason
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23912/#review55787
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [23912]
All tests passed.
-
On Oct. 6, 2014, 10:02 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/reap.cpp, lines 124-127
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26229/diff/1/?file=710088#file710088line124
Why do you need a variable for this? Can't this just be a 'return'
statement?
If there's a reason
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 12:22 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26436/#review55807
---
src/slave/containerizer/docker.cpp
On Oct. 7, 2014, 5:32 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
Can you use unique_ptr directly now? If yes, I would suggest using
unique_ptr directly in libprocess. Here are the reasons:
1) We use lots of shared_ptr in libprocess. Mixing Owned with shared_ptr
seems to be confusing.
2) What if the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55823
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Niklas Nielsen
On Oct. 8, 2014, 9:22 a.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26150/#review55824
---
A high-level comment: It is a bit hard to understand what's going
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23710/#review55831
---
Hey Tim, did you get to address Adam's comment on the off-by-one
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23912/#review55834
---
src/slave/slave.cpp
On Oct. 8, 2014, 5:32 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/benchmarks.cpp, line 200
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26150/diff/1/?file=708531#file708531line200
I am not sure we have graced range based loops yet. Do you have any
references to whether it is
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26436/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 6:43 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Benjamin
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26436/#review55867
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [26436]
All tests passed.
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55874
---
src/module/manager.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 4:52 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26459/
---
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
Repository: mesos-git
Description
.
--
[...truncated 76074 lines...]
I1008 22:10:09.400147 22334 hierarchical_allocator_process.hpp:563] Recovered
cpus(*):1; mem(*):10112; disk(*):3.70122e+06; ports(*):[31000-32000] (total
allocatable: cpus(*):1; mem(*):10112; disk(*):3.70122e+06;
ports(*):[31000-32000]) on slave 20141008-214550
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/25848/#review55886
---
Ship it!
Alright! Kapil and I have made a few minor style/syntax
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26459/#review55888
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [26459]
All tests passed.
-
On Oct. 7, 2014, 9:46 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
I'm curious why you need to expose both sides of the bounds? Our tests
currently hard-code 1 second as the reap interval, and since Ian did not
change the maximum, the tests continue to function as expected.
Are you planning to follow
See https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/1899/changes
Changes:
[benjamin.hindman] Added style/syntax changes made to modules abstractions.
--
Started by an SCM change
Building remotely on ubuntu-1 (docker Ubuntu ubuntu) in workspace
On Oct. 8, 2014, 12:32 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
Can you use unique_ptr directly now? If yes, I would suggest using
unique_ptr directly in libprocess. Here are the reasons:
1) We use lots of shared_ptr in libprocess. Mixing Owned with shared_ptr
seems to be confusing.
2) What if the
See https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/1900/
--
[URLTrigger] A change within the response URL invocation (log)
Building remotely on ubuntu-5 (docker Ubuntu ubuntu5 ubuntu) in workspace
https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/ws/
git
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26467/
---
Review request for mesos and Niklas Nielsen.
Repository: mesos-git
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26467/#review55896
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Niklas Nielsen
On Oct. 8, 2014, 4:33 p.m.,
+Kapil, benh
Can you guys take a look?
Kapil, can you use the pre-commit hook to catch this kind of error?
http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/mesos-developers-guide/
https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/support/hooks/pre-commit#L10
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Apache Jenkins
Fixed in https://reviews.apache.org/r/26467/ - sorry for the noise
Niklas
On 8 October 2014 16:32, Apache Jenkins Server jenk...@builds.apache.org
wrote:
See https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/1900/
--
[URLTrigger] A change within the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26208/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 11:39 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26206/
---
(Updated Oct. 8, 2014, 11:39 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
See https://builds.apache.org/job/mesos-reviewbot/1901/changes
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26208/
---
(Updated Oct. 9, 2014, 12:11 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26206/
---
(Updated Oct. 9, 2014, 12:14 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26208/
---
(Updated Oct. 9, 2014, 12:15 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
See
https://builds.apache.org/job/Mesos-Trunk-Ubuntu-Build-In-Src-Set-JAVA_HOME/2153/changes
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26208/#review55914
---
Bad patch!
Reviews applied: [26206, 26207]
Failed command: git
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26470/
---
Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Vinod Kone.
Repository: mesos-git
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26470/#review55920
---
Should probably file a ticket for the state.json inaccuracy?
A
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26159/
---
(Updated Oct. 9, 2014, 12:41 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26206/#review55922
---
Ship it!
src/slave/slave.cpp
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26206/
---
(Updated Oct. 9, 2014, 1:12 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26382/
---
(Updated Oct. 9, 2014, 1:18 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26470/#review55929
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [26470]
All tests passed.
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26472/
---
Review request for mesos, Adam B and Dominic Hamon.
Bugs: MESOS-1870
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26473/
---
Review request for mesos, Adam B and Dominic Hamon.
Bugs: MESOS-1870
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26476/
---
Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Niklas Nielsen.
Repository:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26382/#review55936
---
Bad patch!
Reviews applied: [26382]
Failed command:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26473/#review55942
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [26472, 26473]
All tests
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26476/#review55944
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [26476]
All tests passed.
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26473/#review55948
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Dominic Hamon
On Oct. 8, 2014, 6:20 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26473/#review55947
---
3rdparty/libprocess/src/httpd.cpp
On Oct. 9, 2014, 3:45 a.m., Dominic Hamon wrote:
3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/option.hpp, line 131
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26476/diff/1/?file=716336#file716336line131
This makes Option arbitrarily large which could be problematic where we
copy it (we
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26476/#review55951
---
Flying by. You may wanna take a look at:
On Oct. 9, 2014, 4:41 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
Flying by. You may wanna take a look at:
https://github.com/facebook/folly/blob/master/folly/Optional.h
Not sure if we can use unstricted union? Does g++44 supports that?
According to https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html unrestricted unions
67 matches
Mail list logo
