> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp, line 53
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159110#file159110line53>
> >
> >     so.. does each stream have a file where it's checkpointing status 
> > updates?
> >     
> >     Perhaps s/path/filepath is more appropriate?

Yes.


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp, line 111
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159110#file159110line111>
> >
> >     Might be better to use Option<int> for the fd, rather than using -1 as 
> > a sentinel value.

agreed. done


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp, line 151
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159110#file159110line151>
> >
> >     where is run used?

This is used by the slave, during recovery. That code hasn't been sent out for 
review yet.


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 66
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line66>
> >
> >     What is path indicating here?

Path is where the status update is checkpointed. It is doc'ed in the header. 
Let me know if it isn't clear.


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 80
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line80>
> >
> >     use path.empty()?

done


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 81
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line81>
> >
> >     capitalize

Its the variable name. quoted it for clarity.


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 154
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line154>
> >
> >     any reason for checking this, the input is a hashmap and so by 
> > definition the keys are unique?

killed


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 215
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line215>
> >
> >     I think inlining these is more intuitive, and they get evaluated once 
> > anyway.

this is an inlined function! also, this will be used in slave.cpp too.


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 226
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line226>
> >
> >     who is ACKing these, the master?
> >     
> >     seems like a lot of communication for all the slaves to be sending 
> > every single status update in serial?

these are acked by the scheduler driver. agree that this could be a scalability 
problem, but i think these kinda optimizations are way down the road.


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 234
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line234>
> >
> >     period, also maybe just have the full comment at the signature rather 
> > than down here? ditto on the others

done


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 318
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line318>
> >
> >     why not do a find to avoid doing the double lookup?

done


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 332
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line332>
> >
> >     use CHECK_NOTNULL and inline it in the assignment:
> >     
> >     streams[id] = CHECK_NOTNULL(stream);
> >     
> >     actually.. benh might not like inlining it

done. i like it :) 


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 344
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line344>
> >
> >     sanity check for contains (use find to avoid double lookups)

done


> On Sept. 28, 2012, 1:14 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp, line 195
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/1/?file=159111#file159111line195>
> >
> >     seems indicative of an ERROR

done


- Vinod


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#review12010
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Sept. 21, 2012, 6:20 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 21, 2012, 6:20 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This is Status Update Manager's API and implementation.
> 
> Haven't included the integration (into slave) and tests yet.
> 
> Rebased off latest trunk
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am df8696920fd48968907270decbef3dda0803f80a 
>   src/messages/messages.proto 2a0321cb3d9e3f6499e2108a3b21516a3bd18d2f 
>   src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vinod Kone
> 
>

Reply via email to