-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#review12463
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26471>

    By inlining I meant not storing the bools and using the expressions in the 
if conditions directly.
    
     if (protobuf::isTerminalState(update.status().state())) {
          if (!stream->pending.empty()) {
    
    I think it makes it more readable. Or at the very least: 
s/empty/emptyStream and s/terminal/terminalState but I would prefer the first 
option.



src/messages/messages.proto
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26478>

    s/Consequently, i/NOTE: I
    
    I think this belongs above the Type enum itself to describe each type in 
the enum. That way they don't really need to be "NOTE:" comments either.



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26497>

    Add these includes:
    
    #include <ostream>
    #include <queue>
    #include <string>
    
    #include <process/pid.hpp>



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26482>

    Enqueued for what?



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26485>

    Alternative phrasing:
    After checkpointing, an ACK is immediately sent to the executor.



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26481>

    s/re-tried/retried
    s/till/until
    s/received/received from the master/



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26487>

    s/to master/to the master



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26488>

    s/ack/ACK



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26491>

    s/>r/> r/



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26495>

    I think you can do
    
    s/acknowledgement/ACK
    s/sendStatusUpdateAcknowledgement/sendStatusUpdateAck
    
    given that the rest of the code / comments talk about 'ACK's.



src/slave/status_updates_manager.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26508>

    s/rtype/recordType here and below.



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26498>

    s/to master/to the master



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26499>

    s/slave/this slave
    
    right?



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26500>

    s/executor/the executor



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26501>

    Is this comment accurate? It said to ignore it, but then it creates a 
stream and opens it?



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26504>

    Was there a reason for the space? " ."



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26505>

    It seems like you'd want to pop() here, no?



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26506>

    Kill newline.



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26507>

    Can you document why you sometimes expect !pid.isSome()? That is, why is 
pid an Option?



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26509>

    Extra indentation here.



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26510>

    Seems like we should add a bool function to Timeout for this case. 
Something like:
    
    timeout.expired();
    timeout.timedOut();
    
    What do you think?
    



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26511>

    Extra semicolon.



src/slave/status_updates_manager.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/#comment26512>

    Rather than return null here, you could just return the Option directly, 
and then there's no need for this function?


- Ben Mahler


On Oct. 15, 2012, 11:46 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/7212/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 15, 2012, 11:46 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Implementation of Status Updates Manager.
> 
> Features:
> -->  Checkpoints status updates and acks.
> --> Reliably sends stats updates
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am cf9364ea0418ec30a75b1774f32bda8de6e031ac 
>   src/messages/messages.proto 4e0538fe929f9091e5cdd4a1bb017d836df52a3e 
>   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