> On Jan. 23, 2018, 10:11 a.m., Santhosh Kumar Shanmugham wrote: > > src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/sla/SlaAlgorithm.java > > Lines 319 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65281/diff/1/?file=1944352#file1944352line319> > > > > Shouldn't `RUNNING` -> `PARTITIONED` be `DOWN`? > > Bill Farner wrote: > +1 > > Stephan Erb wrote: > I considered this as at first as well. However, it is the users choice to > be in `PARTITIONED` state, so this should not be counted as "cluster-induced > downtime". In addition, `PARTITIONED` does not indicate that the task is > down. It merely means that we don't know. > > David McLaughlin wrote: > That was my thought too. They are optimistically still running.
That makes sense. Shouldn't we then include the time spent in `PARTITIONED` as `UP` in that case? If I am reading it correctly, we will exclude time spent in `PARTITIONED`, even if the task came an `UP` state. - Santhosh Kumar ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65281/#review196047 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 22, 2018, 10:02 p.m., David McLaughlin wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/65281/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 22, 2018, 10:02 p.m.) > > > Review request for Aurora and Jordan Ly. > > > Repository: aurora > > > Description > ------- > > Support PARTITIONED state in SLA calculations. Also added a test to protect > against this test failing in the future. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/sla/SlaAlgorithm.java > 5d8d5bd8f705770979f284d26d2e932aabe707e5 > src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/sla/SlaAlgorithmTest.java > 2e719ac6b7aea86faa22deff2cc6b5f73135761c > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65281/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > ./gradlew test > > > Thanks, > > David McLaughlin > >