-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34970/#review86344
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/examples/oversubscribing_framework.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/34970/#comment138302>

    reorder



src/examples/oversubscribing_framework.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/34970/#comment138306>

    Is the framework expected to ever terminate under normal circumstances?
    
    As it is currently written, this framework cannot be part of 'make check' 
right? That's a bummer. We  really need to have an end to end test that 
exercises oversubscription flow.
    
    Can we take the task command line as a parameter? that way for make check 
we can pass in a short lived task and for using externally we can pass in a 
never-neding task as you did here.
    
    thoughts?


- Vinod Kone


On June 3, 2015, 1:21 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/34970/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 3, 2015, 1:21 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2655
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2655
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Based on a flag, this framework oversubscribes a particular resource.
> 
> Currently, only `--oversubscribed_resource=cpus` is supported, which launches 
> tasks that consume revocable cpus using a tight while loop in the shell.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am a5a7306b1ef65ca2b643653779ab76c26dbb5c90 
>   src/examples/oversubscribing_framework.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34970/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Since we do not have an non-zero estimator yet, I modified the slave to send 
> revocable resources in order to manually test this.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ben Mahler
> 
>

Reply via email to