-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#review207915
-----------------------------------------------------------



Still not finished reviewing yet.


src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.hpp
Lines 94 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291575>

    I was wondering if a `hashmap<std::string, PathInfo>` or a 
`vector<PathInfo>` (with a path field in `PathInfo`. is better here. The only 
cane we use the key to find the `PathInfo` is for sandbox, but I feel that we 
could probably treat all paths homogeneously,
    so instead of the following in all methods:
    
    1. Process the sandbox
    2. Process the volume for each volume in paths
    
    We could just do:
    
    1. Process the volume for each volume in paths (including the sandbox, 
whose `disk` is none)
    
    Also maybe `QuotaInfo` is a better name?
    
    Thoughts?



src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.hpp
Lines 128 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291553>

    I was wondering if we want to keep the pair here. From what I read, we 
store the result of `getDeviceForPath` when adding a path into 
`scheduledProjects`, then use it once when removing it. Instead of storing the 
device path in this pair, we could leave `scheduledProjects` as is, and then 
call `getDeciveForPath` in `reclaimProjectIds`. This would also avoid extra 
copyes when doing `utils::copy`. WDYT?



src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.cpp
Line 78 (original), 88 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291557>

    Not yours, but since we're accounting for persistent volumes now, it might 
be a good idea to rename this to something like `getSandboxDisk` or 
`getSandboxQuota`?



src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.cpp
Lines 93-99 (original), 98-104 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291570>

    Not yours, but disk resources that can be used as sandboxes cannot have the 
`disk` field set. So we could simply replace these checks with the following 
one:
    ```
    if (resource.has_disk()) {
      continue;
    }
    ```



src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.cpp
Lines 240-246 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291547>

    Nit: let's move this closer to the place it is used.



src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.cpp
Line 347 (original), 396 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291548>

    No need to break the line here.



src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.cpp
Lines 476 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291574>

    Don't we have the same problem for ROOT and PATH disks (w/ or w/o `root`)? 
Or is the assumption here that the operator must ensure that all ROOT and PATH 
disks are on XFS?
    
    Is there a way to check if the sandbox and persistent volumes are on XFS, 
and set the quota only for those that are on XFS?



src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.cpp
Lines 489 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/#comment291571>

    s/moust/must/


- Chun-Hung Hsiao


On Aug. 24, 2018, 11:26 p.m., James Peach wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 24, 2018, 11:26 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Chun-Hung Hsiao, Ilya Pronin, Jie Yu, Joseph Wu, 
> and Jiang Yan Xu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-5158
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5158
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added persistent volume support to the `disk/xfs` isolator. This
> implementation largely tracks the `disk/du` implementation in that
> we now keep a map of paths in each container info structure. We now
> defer quota clean up to project ID reclaimation time so that we can
> use the same mechanism for sandbox and persistent volume paths.
> 
> We explicitly exclude mount disks from XFS project quotas, but we still
> track them so that we can correctly publish their usage information in
> the container `DiskStatistics` message. This means that mount disks are
> not required to be XFS filesystems or have project quotas configured.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.hpp 
> 38c467b47cb7c04803b0709b8239458fb26abb61 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/xfs/disk.cpp 
> 783da0407528c044035d18cc59a744353921d64c 
>   src/tests/containerizer/xfs_quota_tests.cpp 
> 59ec182c1c3af3978156044f03d9e3d784d51fce 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/68401/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> sudo make check (Fedora 28)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James Peach
> 
>

Reply via email to