Punting, filed: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-527
And gave a Ship-It on https://reviews.apache.org/r/11814 as an interim solution. On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Benjamin Mahler <[email protected] > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Vinod Kone <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 1) Should we simply always set the Task.executor_id for these tasks? The >> master could do so currently, but there would be an implicit contract that >> the slave and master both use the task id as the executor id. >> >> I like this. I think this is the most straightforward to implement. We >> can enforce the contract by having a helper function that both master and >> slave use to get the executor id from task info? >> >> >>> 2) We can add a boolean is_command_executor to Task, so that both the >>>> master and slave can set the field, and the slave can use the boolean in >>>> executorTerminated() to determine whether the task used a command executor. >>>> >>>> Not sure how this solves the problem that you are trying to solve? >> > > This would ideally be included alongside 1. > > >> >> >> >>> 3) Alternatively, we can add a /frameworks/FID/tasks/TID url format >>>> for the broken links on the master webui, so that we can search for the >>>> task in the slave state to locate its executor. >>>> >>> >>> >> I'm ok with this as a short term solution. IIUC, this is going to be an >> expensive lookup because of the way the slave state is currently stored? >> > > Agreed, I think I'll start with 3 as it's purely a webui change. If we run > into additional complexity because of the missing executor IDs for command > executors, we can look at changing the protobufs. >
