----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/19312/#review37431 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/slave/containerizer/containerizer.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/19312/#comment68957> Can you elaborate on why you think using 50% of the memory is a better approach than leaving 1GB free? I think most users are looking for the slave to offer the "right" amount of memory, leaving enough for the operating system and the slave itself. Given this, 50% seems too conservative. I'm not sure how beneficial a percentage-based approach is here, since it assumes that the amount of memory overhead of the OS/mesos-slave is relative to the total memory on the machine. It would be great to look at the cases where this logic leads to a poor choice of memory allocation: 1. If the machine has 1.1GB we will take 1GB and leave .1GB for OS/mesos-slave. 2. If the machine has 768MB, we will take 768MB and leave 0MB for the OS/mesos-slave. - Ben Mahler On March 17, 2014, 6:07 p.m., ASHUTOSH JAIN wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/19312/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 17, 2014, 6:07 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler. > > > Bugs: MESOS-1105 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1105 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > using 50% as criteria. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/containerizer.cpp d0a1023 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/19312/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > ASHUTOSH JAIN > >
