----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/48751/#review138950 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/master/http.cpp (line 1462) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/48751/#comment204143> Wondering if we should not incur the performance penalty by evolving the response. We can just have a comment here about the reasoning for not doing so? We already do something similar for `SlaveID` -> `AgentID` evolve for performance reasons? - Anand Mazumdar On June 21, 2016, 9:37 p.m., Zhitao Li wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/48751/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 21, 2016, 9:37 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Anand Mazumdar and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-5489 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5489 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Implement GetState response for master API. > > The response protobuf message and new function `_getState` will be reused for > generating snapshot for Subscribe call in next patch. > > > Diffs > ----- > > include/mesos/master/master.proto 639fbd110df4aca1cf700cb9e455eecc110a7f66 > include/mesos/v1/master/master.proto > c5b57ddc6aca0a62fb28523aee2fa579212da0ed > src/master/http.cpp 0196a79b4941ed6031afee8dfc35e11e23f07244 > src/master/master.hpp 2064f849edf6f78b009ecfcc4b15b6831834345c > src/tests/api_tests.cpp 55df322f6a843e52d67bb09d3fe763739515602b > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/48751/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > New test in MasterAPITest. > > > Thanks, > > Zhitao Li > >
