[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4058?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15102498#comment-15102498
]
Joris Van Remoortere commented on MESOS-4058:
---------------------------------------------
{code}
commit 579edcc8552842ead7846ffa099de25f8c2dc367
Author: Alexander Rukletsov <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 15 15:57:38 2016 -0500
Quota: Ensured `QuotaInfo` is valid in registrar tests.
Resources in `QuotaInfo` protobuf must not specify role, hence
remove all occurrences of `flatten()` and add explicit validation.
Review: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41948/
commit 1f33a3e6cb5a2b6dd2b51c638833819bde5c6b5c
Author: Alexander Rukletsov <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 15 15:56:40 2016 -0500
Quota: Changed signature of `QuotaInfo` validation.
Review: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41947/
commit f23129e117a08032015fc1966d8ed186ef2e4f68
Author: Alexander Rukletsov <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 15 15:56:25 2016 -0500
Quota: Require role in set request explicitly.
A set quota request must provide a role, which now must be passed as
a top-level field in the request JSON and not in `Resource` objects.
Review: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41936/
{code}
> Do not use `Resource.role` for resources in quota request.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-4058
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4058
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: master
> Reporter: Alexander Rukletsov
> Assignee: Alexander Rukletsov
> Labels: mesosphere
>
> To be consistent with other operator endpoints and to adhere to the principal
> of least surprise, move role from each {{Resource}} in quota set request to
> the request itself.
> {{Resource.role}} is used for reserved resources. Since quota is not a direct
> reservation request, to avoid confusion we shall not reuse this field for
> communicating the role for which quota should be reserved.
> Food for thought: Shall we try to keep internal storage protobufs as close as
> possible to operator's JSON to provide some sort of a schema or decouple
> those two for the sake of flexibility?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
