> On June 13, 2017, 10:58 a.m., Benjamin Mahler wrote: > > src/common/resources.cpp > > Lines 846-849 (original), 870-914 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60013/diff/1/?file=1748842#file1748842line870> > > > > This was a little tough to read through, I wonder if the following > > would be easier to read: > > > > ``` > > // Validate all of the roles. > > foreach (const ReservationInfo& reservation, resource.reservations()) { > > Option<Error> error = roles::validate(reservation.role()); > > if (error.isSome()) { > > return error; > > } > > > > if (reservation.role() == "*") { > > return Error("Invalid reservation: role \"*\" cannot be reserved"); > > } > > } > > > > // Validate that each reservation is a refinement of the > > // preceding reservation. > > string parentRole = resource.reservations(0).role(); > > > > for (int i = 1; i < resource.reservations_size(); ++i) { > > if (resource.reservations(i).type() == > > Resource::ReservationInfo::STATIC) { > > return Error( > > "Invalid refined reservation: A refined reservation" > > " cannot be static."); > > } > > > > const string& childRole = resource.reservations(i).role(); > > > > if (!isSubRole(parentRole, childRole)) { > > return Error( > > "Invalid refined reservation: role '" + childRole + > > "' is not a refinement of '" + parentRole + "'"); > > } > > > > parentRole = role; > > } > > ``` > > > > Granted, this doesn't have your tokenize optimization, but perhaps for > > now we just add a TODO to optimize this? It seems to me there are bigger > > optimizations than just halving the number of tokenizations, like avoiding > > the copying that tokenization incurs altogether.
Okay, the optimization is there because I'm already worried about this code because `Resources::validate` as far as remember is one of the hottest paths. - Michael ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60013/#review177695 ----------------------------------------------------------- On June 13, 2017, 1:34 a.m., Michael Park wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/60013/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 13, 2017, 1:34 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Benjamin Mahler. > > > Bugs: MESOS-7655 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7655 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Resources: Updated the validation logic. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/common/resources.cpp f89f1aae7845f1e93dd5947de2e7a8e2bfce8bc4 > src/master/validation.hpp 6b53e34f67f6a8b338b92db6cb7398f1dccce5a9 > src/master/validation.cpp f45f9e816bdaf6304794604570edbd68d5faf715 > src/tests/master_validation_tests.cpp > 4e7ce74edf0069b9317f869b299694a45e2a62f2 > src/v1/resources.cpp 24240eedc4b2747ca02998534437318c3396db4d > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60013/diff/2/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Michael Park > >
