-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/35264/#review87468
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



src/tests/monitor_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/35264/#comment139788>

    Why not keep MonitorTest to be clear that these are unit tests, and 
introduce a MonitorIntegrationTest that inherits from MesosTest?
    
    I could imagine multiple test cases within integration, so seems better on 
the left hand side:
    
    MonitorIntegrationTest.RunningExecutor
    MonitorIntegrationTest.TerminatedExecutors
    
    Just as an example.



src/tests/monitor_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/35264/#comment139789>

    This case is still ok for taking a const &, since it's not a temporary.



src/tests/monitor_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/35264/#comment139791>

    Took me awhile to figure out that this was calling process::address(). :)
    
    At least we should be adding the process:: qualifier here, no?


- Ben Mahler


On June 10, 2015, 6:30 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/35264/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 10, 2015, 6:30 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Niklas Nielsen, and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2818
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2818
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added a slave integration test in MonitorTest.
> 
> This test verifies the wiring between resource monitor and the slave.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/monitor_tests.cpp 6de8b1f65843fd7b852dfa69627a1c435b482fe0 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/35264/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jie Yu
> 
>

Reply via email to