----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57564/#review170780 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! src/master/allocator/sorter/drf/sorter.hpp Lines 214-217 (original), 215-216 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/57564/#comment243659> A TODO to consolidate this into the client struct would be helpful for posterity - Benjamin Mahler On March 31, 2017, 8:15 p.m., Neil Conway wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/57564/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 31, 2017, 8:15 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier, Benjamin Mahler, and Michael Park. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > DRFSorter previously removed inactive clients from the `clients` > collection, and then re-added clients when they were reactivated. This > resulted in resetting the allocation count for the client, which is > unfortunate. This scheme would also be more difficult to adapt to > hierarchical sorting. > > This commit changes DRFSorter to continue to store inactive clients in > the `clients`; inactive clients are indicated by a new field in the > `Client` struct, and are omitted from the return value of > `DRFSorter::sort`. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/master/allocator/sorter/drf/sorter.hpp > 76329220e1115c1de7810fb69b943c78c078be59 > src/master/allocator/sorter/drf/sorter.cpp > ed54680cecb637931fc344fbcf8fd3b14cc24295 > src/tests/sorter_tests.cpp ec0636beb936d46a253d19322f2157abe95156b6 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57564/diff/3/ > > > Testing > ------- > > `make check` > > > Thanks, > > Neil Conway > >
