> On June 22, 2015, 2:13 p.m., Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > > Looks like a copy-paste bug. How have you found it? Was the test flaky? > > Michael Park wrote: > I was using these tests as a reference for writing my new tests for > [r35702](https://reviews.apache.org/r/35702/) and noticed it. > > Alexander Rukletsov wrote: > I wonder why they were not flaky. > > Michael Park wrote: > Because `filtersForever` gets default-constructed, it gets initialized > with the default value of 5 seconds. We set it to > `std::numeric_limits<double>::max()` to be certain + documentation. > Practically, since the test finishes within a second, 5 seconds was "forever" > enough.
Makes sense. Thanks for the explanation! - Alexander ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/35703/#review88784 ----------------------------------------------------------- On June 20, 2015, 8:51 p.m., Michael Park wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/35703/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 20, 2015, 8:51 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov and Jie Yu. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > `set_refuse_seconds` should have been called on `filtersForever` rather than > `filters`. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/reservation_tests.cpp 755a375346e0be290d4b8ffac3ecf5e7d191970d > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/35703/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > `make check` > > > Thanks, > > Michael Park > >
