> On Feb. 19, 2014, 12:03 a.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote: > > src/master/registry.proto, line 36 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18158/diff/1/?file=486550#file486550line36> > > > > What about nesting these types in Registry? The one benefit is that we > > can kill the 'registry' namespace and just keep everything in 'Registry'.
I originally had not done this because I was concerned about my point (2) above in reply to Vinod's comment. If we were to migrate away from a single "registry" key, I was concerned that the encoding of a nested message would differ. However, the encoding is the same, so this seems good! https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/encoding#embedded - Ben ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18158/#review34809 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 15, 2014, 12:57 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/18158/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 15, 2014, 12:57 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-764 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-764 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > The registrar now uses a single Variable for the Registry, as outlined within: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MESOS/Registrar+Design+Document > > As a heads up, there are a number of changes / fixes that will follow this as > well, I am attempting to break these changes apart. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/master/registrar.cpp 915885a160f790399e8185c28c6e6555af1ee76e > src/master/registry.proto bd850997c57153cdfc0c39d0dae7d2b802034aa3 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18158/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Ben Mahler > >
