> On July 13, 2016, 9:30 a.m., Jonathan Hurley wrote:
> > I'm going to +1 this, but I'd still like to know how other commiters feel 
> > about making the socket commands paramters vs actual parts of the source 
> > element.
> 
> Jayush Luniya wrote:
>     Parameters make more sense for script alerts than port alerts in my 
> opinion.
> 
> Nate Cole wrote:
>     I agree with Jayush and Jonathan: writing/reading from a port alert feels 
> like it should be part of the source element.

Thanks Jonathan, Jayush, and Nate. Since this patch was commited already, I'm 
going to close this review.
If someone revert this patch, I'll reopen this and fix the patch.
Thank you for reviewing.


- Masahiro


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/48972/#review141993
-----------------------------------------------------------


On July 12, 2016, 6:50 a.m., Masahiro Tanaka wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/48972/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 12, 2016, 6:50 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Ambari, Florian Barca, Jonathan Hurley, and Nate Cole.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AMBARI-17253
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMBARI-17253
> 
> 
> Repository: ambari
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> There are too many WARNING in ZooKeeper log.
> ```
> 2016-06-15 21:02:15,405 - WARN  
> [NIOServerCxn.Factory:0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:2181:NIOServerCnxn@357] - caught end of 
> stream exception
> EndOfStreamException: Unable to read additional data from client sessionid 
> 0x0, likely client has closed socket
>         at 
> org.apache.zookeeper.server.NIOServerCnxn.doIO(NIOServerCnxn.java:228)
>         at 
> org.apache.zookeeper.server.NIOServerCnxnFactory.run(NIOServerCnxnFactory.java:208)
>         at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
> ```
> 
> It may be because of Ambari Alert. Ambari Alert pings to the zookeeper port 
> to do monitoring.
> We should use 'ruok' to monitor zookeepers.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   ambari-agent/src/main/python/ambari_agent/alerts/port_alert.py 1918327 
>   ambari-agent/src/test/python/ambari_agent/TestPortAlert.py dffa56c 
>   
> ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/state/alert/PortSource.java
>  d7279de 
>   
> ambari-server/src/main/java/org/apache/ambari/server/upgrade/UpgradeCatalog240.java
>  7ef12a7 
>   
> ambari-server/src/main/resources/common-services/ZOOKEEPER/3.4.5/alerts.json 
> 469036a 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/48972/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> mvn clean test
> 
> ```
> +1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment 
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12811835/AMBARI-17253.2.patch
> against trunk revision .
> +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
> +1 tests included. The patch appears to include 1 new or modified test files.
> +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac 
> compiler warnings.
> +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of 
> release audit warnings.
> +1 core tests. The patch passed unit tests in .
> Test results: 
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Ambari-trunk-test-patch/7427//testReport/
> Console output: 
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Ambari-trunk-test-patch/7427//console
> This message is automatically generated.
> ```
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Masahiro Tanaka
> 
>

Reply via email to