----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34616/#review85031 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! LGTM! Could you please add a NOTE somewhere stating that the default allocator provides DRF on the total pool of both revokable and non-revokable resources. So it's possible that a framework allocated with many non-revokable offers will unlikely to get revokable resources. We may want to experiment with using DRF separately for revokable and non-revokable resources in the future. - Jie Yu On May 22, 2015, 9:41 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/34616/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 22, 2015, 9:41 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Niklas Nielsen. > > > Bugs: MESOS-2734 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2734 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Just ending up resuing the existing variables (Slave.total and > Slave.available) to store oversubscribed resources. The nice thing is that > the changes are minimal. Also, we could potentially reuse updateSlave() to > also update slave's total resources in the future. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.hpp > 4b36d42b0c4614493562e57c5eac90c6c38ca087 > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_tests.cpp > 1a43dc72e739f3c55787716d680faa42a7d0d86f > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34616/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Vinod Kone > >
