> On Feb. 28, 2014, 10:25 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > src/launcher/executor.cpp, lines 215-216 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18604/diff/1/?file=506639#file506639line215> > > > > Do we still need this TODO, and/or should we document the fact that the > > slave will take care of kill escalation?
Ah - shoot. I should have removed that comment. How about leaving a comment along the lines of the RR description: // If the processes doesn't respond to SIGTERM, the slave will call // containerizer->destroy() after EXECUTOR_SHUTDOWN_GRACE_PERIOD seconds. // MesosContainerizer::destroy() calls SIGKILL on the process tree which // effectively is the necessary signal escalation. - Niklas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18604/#review35807 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 27, 2014, 6:07 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/18604/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 27, 2014, 6:07 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos. > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > If command executor processes doesn't respond to SIGTERM during shutdown, the > slave will call containerizer->destroy() after EXECUTOR_SHUTDOWN_GRACE_PERIOD > seconds. > MesosContainerizer::destroy() calls SIGKILL on the process tree which > effectively is the necessary signal escalation. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/launcher/executor.cpp e30d77a > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18604/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Niklas Nielsen > >
