> On Jan. 21, 2015, 7:28 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
> > src/tests/cluster.hpp, lines 100-101
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29890/diff/3/?file=826906#file826906line100>
> >
> >     This should be implied and applies to many places in the source base. 
> > One example is start() in for the slave where the containerizer's lifetime 
> > is managed by the caller (if provided). I don't think this comment is 
> > necessary.

Ok, let's drop it.


> On Jan. 21, 2015, 7:28 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
> > src/tests/cluster.hpp, line 129
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29890/diff/3/?file=826906#file826906line129>
> >
> >     I still don't understand why you need the raw pointer. Is it to 
> > distinguish between the life-time of the provided one and the "default" 
> > one? Try to take a look at how the containerizer is being handled in slave 
> > start() - could we reuse that pattern for consistency?

I think my design is a bit clearer about what's our intention and according 
object lifetimes are, but let's go for consistency. I'll re-work this.


> On Jan. 21, 2015, 7:28 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
> > src/tests/master_allocator_tests.cpp, lines 79-82
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29890/diff/3/?file=826908#file826908line79>
> >
> >     Is this still relevant with the allocator destructor (which tears down 
> > the process as well)?

No, and this comment is gone in a following RR (where the status quo is 
restored). I'll kill it here.


- Alexander


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29890/#review68980
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 20, 2015, 5:59 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/29890/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 20, 2015, 5:59 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Bernd Mathiske and Niklas Nielsen.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2213
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2213
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Introduce a basic Allocator interface that every allocator should implement. 
> This interface does not require allocators to be based on libprocess process. 
> For allocators they do implement allocation logic via an internal libprocess 
> process, a special wrapper is provided. Allocator uses and tests are updated 
> to use Allocator type instead of AllocatorProcess.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/local/local.cpp 76e73a4 
>   src/master/allocator.hpp 224569a 
>   src/master/hierarchical_allocator_process.hpp ccd37b4 
>   src/master/main.cpp e5e76ce 
>   src/tests/cluster.hpp 74cedb3 
>   src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp 7c05123 
>   src/tests/master_allocator_tests.cpp 2430622 
>   src/tests/mesos.hpp 591134b 
>   src/tests/mesos.cpp 3b98c69 
>   src/tests/resource_offers_tests.cpp d098e70 
>   src/tests/slave_recovery_tests.cpp 809822e 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/29890/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make distcheck (Ubuntu, OS X)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rukletsov
> 
>

Reply via email to