-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#review26139
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



src/master/master.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51023>

    CHECK(!tasks.contains(key)) or CHECK_EQ(0, tasks.count(key))?
    
    Would this benefit from including the framework id?



src/master/master.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51024>

    CHECK(tasks.contains(key))? Include framework id in the message?



src/master/master.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51025>

    framework id?



src/master/master.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51026>

    framework id?



src/master/master.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51029>

    CHECK(offers.empty())?



src/master/master.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51031>

    Mention that it was discarded? In retrospect I think I should not have made 
this a CHECK. Rather we should ignore it and LOG(WARNING), up to you whether 
you want to fix that now.



src/master/master.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51034>

    CHECK(frameworks.contains(frameworkInfo.id()))



src/master/master.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51035>

    wrap the comment at 70 lines?



src/master/master.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51038>

    Why the leading space?



src/master/master.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51039>

    Why the leading space?



src/master/master.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51040>

    Use contains?



src/slave/gc.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51041>

    "for gc"?



src/slave/paths.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51043>

    Can we remove this altogether in favor of logging in the caller?



src/slave/paths.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51044>

    Can we remove this altogether in favor of logging in the caller?



src/slave/slave.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51045>

    Ditto on CHECK vs ignore and log, but up to you as to whether you'd like to 
change it.



src/slave/slave.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/#comment51046>

    CHECK_NE?


- Ben Mahler


On Sept. 14, 2013, 12:10 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 14, 2013, 12:10 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Ben Mahler, and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/master.hpp 19be184610fd9d75e47f44dc804afefe0babe7a6 
>   src/master/master.cpp 30abe9d4f4576a961c3d427f083fc2ce5c92b601 
>   src/slave/gc.cpp 827534f1cfbc848fce799340dd0ff8dcff3f8a11 
>   src/slave/paths.hpp 3a02a0d6a977b1af7c7f7b9d75bd4a44b0c53c2b 
>   src/slave/slave.cpp cefb42004da15d390c276ad5337b558ba5bf8e59 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14135/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vinod Kone
> 
>

Reply via email to