> On Aug. 23, 2013, 1:26 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > src/master/master.cpp, line 1899 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/13757/diff/1/?file=344097#file344097line1899> > > > > A comment here would be nice. > > > > Also, why not just ignore these messages in > > Master::reregisterFramework()?
It's possible for the same PID to re-register with failover == true (e.g. if the scheduler crashed and restarted on the same machine). In that case, we'll still need to go through the motions of setting it to active and flushing the offers, no? - Ben ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13757/#review25450 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Aug. 23, 2013, 4:15 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/13757/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Aug. 23, 2013, 4:15 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-488 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-488 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > See MESOS-659. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/master/master.cpp d53b8bb97da45834790cca6e04b70b969a8d3453 > src/tests/fault_tolerance_tests.cpp > 10e52c401476eb8416361de49b8e4061bb7ac4f3 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13757/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Added a test that catches this case when not fixed. > > > Thanks, > > Ben Mahler > >
