-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/62655/#review186600
-----------------------------------------------------------


Fix it, then Ship it!




LGTM!


src/master/master.cpp
Lines 6765 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/62655/#comment263288>

    Add one line above.


- Jie Yu


On Sept. 28, 2017, 6:42 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/62655/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 28, 2017, 6:42 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Jan Schlicht.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The 'UpdateSlaveMessage' could either transport an update to an
> agent's total, or to its oversubscribed resources. In certain
> scenarios this required the agent to send two messages where before
> one was sufficient. When talking to a master which did not understand
> the 'type' field this would have let the master to rescind all offers
> for revocable resources from that agent.
> 
> This patch changes the message to be a union of possible updates,
> i.e., it is now possible to send updates to both the total and the
> oversubscribed resources simultaneously on agent registration and
> reregistration without the master rescinding offers for revocable
> resources on the agent.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/master/master.cpp 6d84a26bff970b842b58dfb69dbf232ba5c16a20 
>   src/messages/messages.proto dc4e19c08d671743f08223dcdf1dbc336b3940bd 
>   src/slave/slave.cpp 75e2e25c438637e2b1731f9fd01b6fe297687c50 
>   src/tests/oversubscription_tests.cpp 
> 02b10d6689dd6f01510cd2d5db2bb76b4b190eca 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62655/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> `make check`; also tested as part of https://reviews.apache.org/r/61183/.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Benjamin Bannier
> 
>

Reply via email to