-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/20047/#review40830
-----------------------------------------------------------



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/statistics.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/20047/#comment74025>

    What about storing min and max separately and exposing them only through 
Statistics::min and Statistics::max? Likewise for median, what about only 
exposing it one way, by killing Statistics::median?



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/statistics.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/20047/#comment74023>

    Something is wrong here :)



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/statistics.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/20047/#comment74021>

    Hmm.. should we just kill median and use p50?


- Ben Mahler


On April 18, 2014, 10:34 p.m., Dominic Hamon wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/20047/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 18, 2014, 10:34 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-1036
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1036
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> see summary
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/Makefile.am d707ad759dacd16e0177e14f1bf5ece9e4ce2491 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/statistics.hpp 
> a4f1db3a8a219c39193a1d237477f0350e47e681 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp 
> 9654c0437edb43cff65dbefdf08dee9e18ef96ab 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/statistics.cpp 
> 75aac4074d33cb5054da6c8b0bd4a890c2eaf80e 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/statistics_tests.cpp 
> 3521bd565dae8fcbba464f2539b3b14a37a037f0 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/timeseries.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/20047/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dominic Hamon
> 
>

Reply via email to