----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/5072/#review7715 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/slave/slave.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/5072/#comment16989> This path seems like a red flag - it must be repeated elsewhere - can you factor up a constant or punch through a config? src/slave/slave.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/5072/#comment16992> Was message exchange discussed, pehaps the master periodically informing each registered slave of the live executors? This long mtime approach seems like ti will work, but it also seems arbitrary. - John On 2012-05-09 02:10:27, Vinod Kone wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/5072/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2012-05-09 02:10:27) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, John Sirois, and Brian Wickman. > > > Summary > ------- > > This is the first cut for GC inside the slave. > > There are 2 kinds of gc going on > > --> Executor work dirs -- These get deleted whenever (after a timeout) an > executor exits/shutdown > --> Old slave dirs -- These get deleted when the slave gets registered for > the first time on a startup > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/slave.hpp 08a29d8 > src/slave/slave.cpp 09a8396 > src/common/utils.hpp 1d81e21 > src/slave/constants.hpp f0c8679 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/5072/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > make check scucceeds. > > Yet to write GC specific tests. > > > Thanks, > > Vinod > >
