> On Aug. 14, 2015, 11:15 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
> > src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/backend.hpp, lines 55-57
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/37382/diff/2/?file=1040433#file1040433line55>
> >
> > Hum, what do yo mean here?
> >
> > I think the backend should be container aware. I.e., we should pass in
> > containerid in 'provision' and destroy will take a containerid as well.
> >
> > There could be multiple rootfs for a container (because image in
> > volumes). When the container finishes, the provisioner will try to destroy
> > all rootfs provisioned for that container.
> >
> > Thoughts?
This is intended for the image in volumes case but I was trying to not be too
explicit because it's not implemented yet (we should track it with a separate
ticket).
My comment about 'nested' was incorrect, let me clarify here.
The 'caller' is the provisioner. What I had in mind was: each Backend call
handles one image, if `Backend::provision()`s one image and then it should
`destroy()` the rootfs provisioned by one image.
Suppose we have such a rootfs dir and each container has multiple rootfses,
some from ContainerInfo::volumnes and one from ContainerInfo::mesos::image but
they are stored side-by-side under <container_id>/<image_type>.
```
<--rootfs_dir>
|--<container_id>
|--<appc>
|--<image_id>
|--<image_id>
|--<docker>
```
IMO since LinuxFilesystemIsolatorProcess::cleanup() calls each
`Provisioner::destory(containerId)` (appc|docker), the provisioner can look at
the subdir it manages and scan it and call `Backend::destroy(rootfsPath)` for
each image under it.
So each `Backend::destroy(rootfsPath)` call destroys one rootfs and there is no
`nesting` under it.
Passing `containerId` into Backend isn't as clean as it should be the
provisioner who converts the id into a path and Backends are this dumb thing
which only knows paths.
More clear?
- Jiang Yan
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37382/#review95455
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Aug. 14, 2015, 10:51 a.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/37382/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Aug. 14, 2015, 10:51 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos, Lily Chen, Ian Downes, Jie Yu, and Timothy Chen.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-2968
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2968
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> The Backend interface is made generic so it can be used by different
> provisioners. See
> [MESOS-2968](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2968?focusedCommentId=14652859&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14652859)
> for details.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> src/Makefile.am b5dbdc316cad179cd265bd81900999fab35940b9
> src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/backend.hpp PRE-CREATION
> src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/backend.cpp PRE-CREATION
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37382/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jiang Yan Xu
>
>
