> On Oct. 1, 2016, 12:11 p.m., Guangya Liu wrote:
> > src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.cpp, line 1311
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/51027/diff/8/?file=1513682#file1513682line1311>
> >
> >     I think that here we should return `Nothing()` but not 
> > `allocation.get()`, as `allocation.get()` will wait till `allocation is 
> > ready`, but here we do not need to wait the till the `allocation become 
> > ready` but just update the `allocationCandidates` as soon as possible.

Since we're not doing anything with this future, I think it is safe to update 
allocation/allocationCandidates here and return Nothing()


- Jacob


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/51027/#review151117
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 4, 2016, 11:31 p.m., Jacob Janco wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/51027/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 4, 2016, 11:31 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Mahler, Guangya Liu, James Peach, Klaus 
> Ma, and Jiang Yan Xu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3157
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3157
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> - Triggered allocations dispatch allocate() only
>   if there is no pending allocation in the queue.
> - Allocation candidates are accumulated and only
>   cleared when enqueued allocations are processed.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.hpp 
> 2c31471ee0f5d6836393bf87ff9ecfd8df835013 
>   src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.cpp 
> c8f9492ee1b69e125a1e841116d22a578a9b524e 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/51027/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> note: check without filters depends on https://reviews.apache.org/r/51028 and 
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52534
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jacob Janco
> 
>

Reply via email to