> On July 16, 2014, 6:22 p.m., Bernd Mathiske wrote: > > src/launcher/executor.cpp, line 320 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/23520/diff/1/?file=632791#file632791line320> > > > > Shouldn't unhealthy be set to true if the incoming parameter 'healthy' > > is false?
Hmm, it is a bit confusing and I wasn't able to come up with good names. This unhealthy flag is really meant that the health check process has marked this task to be killed after number of failed checks. Let me try to rename . - Timothy ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23520/#review47916 ----------------------------------------------------------- On July 15, 2014, 8:30 p.m., Timothy Chen wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23520/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 15, 2014, 8:30 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Niklas Nielsen. > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > Currently after the health check receives configured amount of task fails it > will initiate a kill task. > However currently the task kill status update doesn't set the healthy field > so it's unclear was it killed because health check or other reasons. > This patch sets the health check field when the task is killed because of > failing health checks. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/launcher/executor.cpp a573637 > src/tests/health_check_tests.cpp 44711fd > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/23520/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Timothy Chen > >
