> On Sept. 12, 2016, 9:27 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > src/tests/slave_tests.cpp, lines 2869-2872 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/50707/diff/7/?file=1493683#file1493683line2869> > > > > It's not clear to me what we are checking to verify that master behaves > > correctly here? What would happen if master behaves incorrectly? Maybe add > > some comments?
Well, we're checking the master does not segfault or hit a `CHECK` failure, which it was doing before I fixed that bug and added this test :) Once `MockRegistrar` is introduced, we can validate that the master doesn't do any registry writes in response to the `markUnreachable` dispatch. I'll add that as a separate review at the end of the chain (we can't do it in this RR because `MockRegistrar` is added in a later RR in this chain). I also improved the comments. - Neil ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/50707/#review148592 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 7, 2016, 9:29 p.m., Neil Conway wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/50707/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 7, 2016, 9:29 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-4049 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4049 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This test tries to simulate a race between marking an agent unhealthy > and receiving an `UnregisterSlaveMessage` for that agent. > > Unfortunately, this test is a little fragile (we need to manually > dispatch an event to the master process to simulate the action that > would be taken by the slave observer). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/slave_tests.cpp 701fab20091f9f7df020290b9f0a9db1dec92647 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/50707/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Neil Conway > >
