Re: Review Request: Fixed a bug where we didn't expect a future to get discarded. We saw this in tests likely because the ordering of process termination was causing the isolation module to get cleaned up before the monitor.

[Vinod Kone]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9975/#review18022
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



src/slave/monitor.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/9975/#comment38064>

    Sounds like futures in continuations should never be CHECKed for discarded. 
Rather they should return an error.


- Vinod Kone


On March 15, 2013, 11:04 p.m., Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/9975/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 15, 2013, 11:04 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/monitor.cpp 18fbd48f2b9759fc950e43a2c61f3d27119e24c7 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/9975/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benjamin Hindman
> 
>