> On Sept. 25, 2016, 7:27 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp, lines 743-748 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52235/diff/1/?file=1509681#file1509681line743> > > > > We still need to call 'destroy' for a container that does not have pid > > to make sure it is properly cleaned up. > > > > ``` > > container->status = pid.isSome() > > ? reap(containerId, pid.get()) > > : Future<Option<int>>(None()); > > > > container->status->onAny(defer(self(), &Self::reaped, containerId)); > > ``` > > Gilbert Song wrote: > I handled the two cases as orphans: > 1. no pid containers. > 2. orphans from in the `extra` list from launcher->recover(). > > they are cleaned up at the end of contaienrizer::_recover(). why do we > call `reaped()` and destroy twice?
Ah, ic. Realized that those will be treated as orphans. Sg. - Jie ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52235/#review150344 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 24, 2016, 6:50 p.m., Gilbert Song wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/52235/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 24, 2016, 6:50 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Artem Harutyunyan, Jie Yu, Joseph > Wu, Kevin Klues, and Vinod Kone. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Supported mesos containerizer recover to be nested aware. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.hpp > 16f9e3e92e90fe7f8a0ebd24e567800e1f285bc9 > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp > 144b0db501d40d4e0bba12672723616bedd76e7e > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52235/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Gilbert Song > >
