-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/8171/#review13750
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/slave/slave.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/8171/#comment29426>

    This TODO will be obviated by my cgroup change, so feel free to remove it, 
unless you also wanted to check here?



src/slave/slave.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/8171/#comment29427>

    These messages seem like they might be a bit confusing for users:
    
    Slave cpus 4.0 cannot be greater than the host cpus 2.0
    
    How about:
    
    Cannot use 4.0 cpus as slave resources, since only 2.0 cpus are present on 
this system.
    
    Ditto for the others.


- Ben Mahler


On Nov. 23, 2012, 7:30 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/8171/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 23, 2012, 7:30 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Now we properly set cpu/mem/disk/ports based on what's missing in slave flags.
> 
> Also moved usage from os to fs.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/slave.cpp 7deb4574943aae4cfc5da5d6b3f600042686975f 
>   src/tests/exception_tests.cpp 13355d08788432ed07679daf24c2d74cc12a7f11 
>   third_party/libprocess/include/stout/fs.hpp 
> 9e62a1b91bc9fac092818ffb3c8bcec46b0bd26d 
>   third_party/libprocess/include/stout/os.hpp 
> 76e5e0624af36a0021755fb4acf7f76bfb81a823 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/8171/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vinod Kone
> 
>

Reply via email to