> On April 23, 2015, 7:10 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > src/scheduler/scheduler.cpp, lines 646-652
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/33465/diff/2/?file=940239#file940239line646>
> >
> >     I realize this hack is necessary to accomplish this in 1 version, but 
> > should we have a TODO here for the master to not set the 'uuid' for 
> > non-retried updates? Similarly, if there are other cases (e.g. in the 
> > slave) where non-retried updates are generated, can we omit the 'uuid'?
> >     
> >     Even better, why not make that change now in 0.23.0 and leave the TODO 
> > here for 0.24.0 to rely on uuid directly?
> >     That will also help us move away from the similar hack in sched.cpp 
> > `statusUpdate` (see my TODO). :)
> >     
> >     Also, how did you test the non-acknowledgement case? :)

updated tests.


- Vinod


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33465/#review81372
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 23, 2015, 5:48 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/33465/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 23, 2015, 5:48 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-1127
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1127
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Now that TaskStatus has 'uuid', we don't need it in UPDATE. It will also make 
> the ACKNOWLEDGE semantics easier.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/scheduler/scheduler.proto 
> 783a63ad1cc0edd86605d638046fb959cb6e97e8 
>   src/examples/low_level_scheduler_libprocess.cpp 
> 63d34eefb60d13fe2b82905c1cec9b762340e997 
>   src/examples/low_level_scheduler_pthread.cpp 
> 6d1f938660c02db75bfcbf7c8de0d941cff1920d 
>   src/scheduler/scheduler.cpp bd9fced0f58aa3bc0ff147dbefb77cea4734a79e 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33465/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Vinod Kone
> 
>

Reply via email to