> On May 25, 2016, 6:27 p.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote:
> > src/master/master.cpp, line 6551
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/47082/diff/1/?file=1375592#file1375592line6551>
> >
> >     I don't feel that this boolean is necessary, we can easily check if a 
> > framework is added by checking if it's in the set (O(1) if hashset), right?

For a std::set, we needed this bool. I think we can avoid this if we use a 
hashset.


> On May 25, 2016, 6:27 p.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote:
> > src/master/master.cpp, lines 6576-6579
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/47082/diff/1/?file=1375592#file1375592line6576>
> >
> >     From `slave->checkpointedResource.reservations()` we can get the list 
> > of roles and from `activeRoles` we can get the list of frameworks for each 
> > role.

Moved this to use activeRoles.


> On May 25, 2016, 6:27 p.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote:
> > src/tests/master_authorization_tests.cpp, lines 338-339
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/47082/diff/1/?file=1375593#file1375593line338>
> >
> >     If we don't expect it to be call, we should do
> >     
> >     ```
> >     EXPECT_CALL(sched, slaveLost(&driver, _))
> >       .Times(0);
> >     ```
> >     
> >     Here and elsewhere.
> >     
> >     But here I think we should fix this to have the framework receive the 
> > slave lost messsage. See the comment below.

Reinstated the original version, since we expect SlaveLostMessage to be sent 
for pending tasks.


> On May 25, 2016, 6:27 p.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote:
> > src/tests/master_authorization_tests.cpp, lines 346-348
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/47082/diff/1/?file=1375593#file1375593line346>
> >
> >     So if the task is stuck in the `pendingTasks` a slave lost message is 
> > not sent but later a TASK_LOST is sent with reason 
> > `REASON_SLAVE_REMOVED`... We should handle this case the same way as the 
> > other cases where we do send slave lost IMO.
> >     
> >     We probably need to add a `pendingTasks` hashmap in the slave as well 
> > and check against that map during `removeSlave()`, thoughts?

Good catch. Yes, added a slave->pendingTasks and use this to send out 
SlaveLostMessage to frameworks with pending tasks.


- Anindya


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/47082/#review134535
-----------------------------------------------------------


On May 26, 2016, 11:56 p.m., Anindya Sinha wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/47082/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 26, 2016, 11:56 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Jiang Yan Xu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-5143
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5143
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When a slave is removed, master sends a LostSlaveMessage to affected
> frameworks only (instead of all registered frameworks). An affected
> framework is a framework which satisfied one or more conditions of
> the following:
> 
> 1. There are running tasks on this slave belonging to the framework.
> 2. There are pending tasks on this slave belonging to the framework.
> 3. Reserved resources on the slave have a matching role with the
>    role of the framework.
> 4. There are pending offers or pending inverse offers from this slave
>    for the framework.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/master.hpp 1a875c32eddfb6d884e3d0dda7f5716ee53966c3 
>   src/master/master.cpp 0005a29caabcc6a3776037cf86a2b12660e6377b 
>   src/tests/master_tests.cpp 34be015aa314a7574e9065efb7b1bb8e1570c5b7 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/47082/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> All existing and modified tests passed.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Anindya Sinha
> 
>

Reply via email to