-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#review155443
-----------------------------------------------------------



LGTM overall. 

It is a *little* concerning that with this change, since the default value for 
min_consecutive_successes is 1 and we've removed the 
sleep(initial_interval_secs) before the first health check, that now by default 
almost everyone will opt into this feature and have vastly different behavior 
than before. If someone was just using initial_interval_secs in lieu of service 
warm-up, they might be in for a shock. I don't see a way around this without 
having to deal with other backwards compatibility issues, but let's be vigilant 
in release notes, etc. documenting the behavior. Might even be worth logging a 
message from the client if they are using a non-default value for 
initial_interval_secs that the behavior has changed? That might be overkill.


src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/health_checker.py (line 64)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#comment225420>

    Description is no longer true.



src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/health_checker.py (lines 91 - 94)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#comment225419>

    Suggest renaming this to grace_period_secs internally.



src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/health_checker.py (line 97)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#comment225406>

    birth_time is more accurate.



src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/health_checker.py (line 128)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#comment225409>

    It looks like a bug that this isn't part of the above conditional. Would 
consider removing the conditional or moving this inside it for clarity.



src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/health_checker.py (line 167)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#comment225415>

    *successful health checks



src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/health_checker.py (line 262)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#comment225413>

    Can you provide the reasoning for this class (from the design-doc) as a 
comment for future readers?



src/test/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/test_health_checker.py (lines 465 
- 466)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/#comment225416>

    I feel like we need more coverage with regards to these input values. At 
the minimum, we should have coverage for  min_consecutive_successes set to 1, 
since it's the default value that will affect existing users and it will help 
us track what exactly is changing.


- David McLaughlin


On Nov. 9, 2016, 8:29 a.m., Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 9, 2016, 8:29 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora, Joshua Cohen, Stephan Erb, and Zameer Manji.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AURORA-1225
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1225
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Make RUNNING a first class state to indicate that the task is running
> and is healthy. It is achieved by introducing a new configuration
> parameter `min_consecutive_successes`, which will dictate when to move
> a task into RUNNING state.
> 
> With this change, it is possible to set the `watch_secs` to 0, so that
> updates are purely based on the task's health, rather than relying on
> watching the task to in RUNNING state for a pre-determined timeout.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   RELEASE-NOTES.md 392496284b7f046a5dd29a5a3f175305c28a5afe 
>   docs/development/design-documents.md 
> 6bfc679c841ef1b0861758ccc12a5150f1bdb5e3 
>   docs/features/job-updates.md 792f2ae5fd14b1ea9af8be000629ce5a7fc2fe8f 
>   docs/reference/configuration.md f2a0b1873f31e91f3bf0cac6f8448e8130fae688 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/api/updater_util.py 
> c649316edb876565c92cc90c9f030e153c008924 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/config.py 
> 0186af52f0d7d7e3981ec59bf6a01aafee2bcfb1 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/config/schema/base.py 
> 845163043b0b7b2f9e7aca14677ca9f094658551 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/aurora_executor.py 
> aee5e56ae66ec7a6acbe97d94d6187fd8646ec9a 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/health_checker.py 
> 3c7c09d173c4adbd89eddaee22cffcdd8d268378 
>   src/test/python/apache/aurora/client/test_config.py 
> 5cf68a5145ddf9478baa30453c0bcb73136fa7eb 
>   src/test/python/apache/aurora/executor/common/test_health_checker.py 
> da0c56ca084b65427a6122f22f251af8637772d1 
>   src/test/python/apache/aurora/executor/test_thermos_executor.py 
> 3f82165333665d127e1ace765a7dada7348a4b91 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/53590/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> buils-support/jenkins/build.sh
> sh ./src/test/sh/org/apache/aurora/e2e/test_end_to_end.sh
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham
> 
>

Reply via email to