[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1094?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14267808#comment-14267808
]
Niklas Quarfot Nielsen commented on MESOS-1094:
-----------------------------------------------
[~idownes] How does this fit with the work that you did? pid namespacing would
still be useful to apply in the command executor, for health checks and so on.
> Introduce pid namespace abstraction to subprocess
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-1094
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1094
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Niklas Quarfot Nielsen
>
> Introducing PID namespacing could simplify signal escalation and process
> control in for example the command executor and pluggable containerizer.
> Along the lines of the Fork Exec abstraction in stout, I suggest that we add
> an abstraction for Linux namespaces.
> LinuxNamespace(PID /* | IPC | mount | ...*/, Fork(Exec("sleep 10"))
> It would be guarded or add convenience methods to ensure system support, for
> example bool LinuxNamespace::supports(PID /* | IPC | ... */) or simply let
> the namespace fall back to regular fork/exec.
> I have a proof-of-concept version of the command executor which use PID
> namespaces (in combination with delay/escalation), and it feels like details
> around stack allocation and management could be captured in a new abstraction
> and make it a neat and nice subsystem to use.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
