-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30090/#review69013
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/slave/monitor/monitor.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/30090/#comment113582>

    When we pull out interfaces like this, it would be great to document why 
it's pulled out. Could we also migrate my TODOs from the existing resource 
monitor?
    
    ```
    // Defines the interface for performing resource monitoring on containers.
    //
    // TODO(nnielsen): Add the HTTP API to this interface to force a
    // minimal API across monitoring implementations. Currently the
    // MesosResourceMonitor implicitly provides the HTTP API.
    //
    // TODO(bmahler): Consider pulling out the resource collection into
    // a Collector abstraction that can be leveraged by the monitor.
    // The monitor can then only be responsible for history and actual
    // "monitoring". For example, isolators to subscribe to resource
    // usage events. (e.g. get a future for the executor hitting 75%
    // memory consumption, the future would become ready when this
    // occurs, and the isolator can discard the future when no longer
    // interested).
    //
    // TODO(bmahler): Consider forwarding usage information to the master.
    ```
    
    I also added a bit TODO about ensuring other modules provide the minimal 
existing HTTP API for container metrics, otherwise using a module may break 
functionality for many users. A follow up on that would be great!



src/slave/monitor/monitor.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/30090/#comment113583>

    This patch introduces a naming conflict with the existing ResourceMonitor, 
since it can be avoided it would have been great do the rename to 
`MesosResourceMonitor` in the same patch, splitting that change seems more 
trouble than keeping them in the same patch.
    
    Accordingly, please atomically commit this along with the rest of your 
chain. Ideally a prefix in the commit message will help see the dependency for 
cherry-picks, etc:
    
    ```
    Monitor modularization 1: Added ResourceMonitor interface
    Monitor modularization 2: ...
    ```
    
    But in the future let's try to avoid naming conflicts like this!



src/slave/monitor/monitor.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/30090/#comment113584>

    period



src/slave/monitor/monitor.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/30090/#comment113599>

    This flag doesn't exist! Should this be depending on something? Is this 
chain created correctly?


- Ben Mahler


On Jan. 20, 2015, 9:38 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/30090/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 20, 2015, 9:38 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2219
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2219
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added abstract interface for already existing monitor API.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/monitor/monitor.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/slave/monitor/monitor.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/30090/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Niklas Nielsen
> 
>

Reply via email to