----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46025/#review128259 -----------------------------------------------------------
Looks good, just some food for thought and a question related to the relationship between `dispose` and `temps`. 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp (lines 353 - 376) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/46025/#comment191680> One question I have looking at this is whether we would benefit from more explicit structure here: ``` struct { map<int, Socket*> sockets; map<int, Address> addresses; set<int> dispose; map<Address, int> temps; map<Address, int> persists; map<int, queue<Encoder*>> outgoing; } outbound; struct { map<int, Socket*> sockets; } inbound; ``` This assumes we don't need to track both inbound and outbound within the same map. From a quick glance at the code I can't see any reason to store them in the same map but perhaps I'm missing something. There seems to be potential for significant consolidation of the outbond structures as well. 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp (lines 356 - 358) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/46025/#comment191679> Why didn't you update this comment? Is the set of values within `temps` equivalent to `dispose`? Would be great to explain the distinction here. - Ben Mahler On April 11, 2016, 2:35 p.m., Neil Conway wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/46025/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 11, 2016, 2:35 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Ben Mahler. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Clarified comments on socket data structures in SocketManager. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp > 5e9dcfdc52f3a8223bc43af149b8e1f5dbdf5b0a > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46025/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Neil Conway > >
