> On May 7, 2015, 8:37 a.m., Adam B wrote: > > Thanks for attacking one of my TODOs. I've got a couple of questions, but > > it looks pretty straightforward to me. > > > > I'm confused about when `==` would be too strict. What fields would you > > expect to differ? Maybe if you got a TASK_LOST followed by a TASK_FAILED > > for the same taskId, as is supposedly possible in some weird race? > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/src/master/master.cpp#L3738 > > > > Testing: > > It's probably unfair to link to a private mesosphere-only build result in > > your Testing section. > > Did the buildbot pass `make distcheck` as well as just `make check`? > > Is there a unit test to verify your change? Do we need one? > > > > I have yet to learn what our recommended coding style is for lambdas now, > > so I'll defer to @jvanremoortere for his approval there.
This was more a question I was pondering myself: the current `==` does a "bitwise" comparison of two `Task` objects; my question was around the "semantic" meaning of equality for two `Task`s: are they *equal* if and only if they are *identical*, or is there a narrower definition of *equality* (eg, at one extreme, one could just use the `Task::task_id` and ignore all other fields). In fact, in this case, should we just do that? (it would certainly address somewhat, if not entirely, your other concern about performance impact) - Marco ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33490/#review82809 ----------------------------------------------------------- On May 7, 2015, 8:26 a.m., Marco Massenzio wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/33490/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 7, 2015, 8:26 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Adam B and Joris Van Remoortere. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2633 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2633 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > In Framework::addCompletedTask(const Task& task) we did not check > for duplicated tasks, so they could be added more than once. > > A simple check has now been added (there still is the issue > of whether the `operator ==` on `Task` is too strict, so as > never to cause a match). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/master/framework.cpp PRE-CREATION > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33490/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > buildbot make check pass > http://build.mesosphere.com:5555/builders/dev_test/builds/13 > > > Thanks, > > Marco Massenzio > >
