----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22156/#review44528 -----------------------------------------------------------
Is having the slave at the same level as containers the long term strategy here? Doesn't the EC need the same fix? - Ben Mahler On June 2, 2014, 6:50 p.m., Ian Downes wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/22156/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 2, 2014, 6:50 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-1449 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1449 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > Do not consider the slave cgroup (from --slave_subsystems) as an orphan > during recover(). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/cpushare.cpp > b494a9236210245383e20fa9ab3dbac01e42f8dd > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/mem.cpp > 6324dcd288975872c26685c713910d778def4e10 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22156/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Manually verified that log message ""Removing orphaned cgroup ... " did not > appear in any slave recovery tests when --slave_subsystems was enabled. > > > Thanks, > > Ian Downes > >
