> On Jan. 6, 2016, 10:09 a.m., Adam B wrote:
> > src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.cpp, lines 1048-1051
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/41597/diff/36/?file=1183523#file1183523line1048>
> >
> >     Does anything rely on this behavior of erasing 1.0s from the hashmap? I 
> > know it'll (slightly) reduce the number of bits in memory and persisted in 
> > the registry, but is there any other reason to do this? Might be a 
> > premature optimization. Besides, the sorters still get updated for 1.0s.
> >     Thoughts?
> 
> Yongqiao Wang wrote:
>     There is no any other reasons for erasing the default weight frm the 
> hasmap. In HierarchicalAllocatorProcess::roleWeight method of allocator, if 
> the role's weight does not exist in weights hashmap, then it will return 1.0. 
> so it is make sence to the erase it.
>     
>     In addition, we should keep the same behaviour to only save the 
> non-default weights in allocator, master and registry.
> 
> Adam B wrote:
>     I'm all for consistency, but since this behavior doesn't exist anywhere 
> else (yet), and there's no strong need for it, I'm inclined to follow the 
> KISS principle and not treat 1.0 updates specially. Let's not erase the 1.0s, 
> and just update weights[role] just like with any other valid value.
>     
>     If it seems like a reasonable speed/space optimization, we can consider 
> it later for allocator, master, and/or registry. I can't foresee any 
> backwards compatibility issues if we have to change it later.

OK, agree.


- Yongqiao


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/41597/#review113035
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 18, 2016, 8:20 a.m., Yongqiao Wang wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/41597/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 8:20 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B, Neil Conway, and Qian Zhang.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3943
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3943
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Add the interface in allocator to support updating weight
> at runtime, and the allocator is invoked to allocate the
> resources based on the updated weights later.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/master/allocator.hpp e163669c9c4e4c98572968f18987704b60722a79 
>   include/mesos/mesos.proto 0be4bed336e86a5c377e87ac6212c70ac3b4c66b 
>   include/mesos/v1/mesos.proto c3244e87f9351c71312d2eace7a49bcac926fafd 
>   src/master/allocator/mesos/allocator.hpp 
> 581eaad376e7b2febe0b6359014617b935a677a3 
>   src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.hpp 
> 101482156ffc5a4fe3cd60be222bfe609330ec3c 
>   src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.cpp 
> 48acde69b1a2f305b568a7e322a58708063dd30a 
>   src/master/allocator/sorter/drf/sorter.hpp 
> 050896e8b12cd4097ccd137d5284d6b39b0f06ab 
>   src/master/allocator/sorter/drf/sorter.cpp 
> 3a442f121f3a1505513877a5c78458a4b8d0a824 
>   src/master/allocator/sorter/sorter.hpp 
> 7be6b44a762fd62c2cd7f28b4dc4865a4587ed26 
>   src/tests/allocator.hpp 206e9ac3a83038a691f7929bdd627042b0f363b0 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41597/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Make & Make check successfully!
> 
> Test case: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41672/
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Yongqiao Wang
> 
>

Reply via email to