-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#review212322
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/csi/client.hpp
Lines 38-39 (original), 38-39 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298071>

    Ah, MESOS-8925 again showing its ugly face :(
    
    Just another datapoint, not necessarily a reason to wory about it right now 
and here.
    
    Here and below.



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.hpp
Lines 34-44 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298072>

    Let's just make these top-level constants in `provider.cpp`, e.g.,
    ```
    constexpr Duration DEFAULT_CSI_RETRY_BACKOFF_FACTOR =  Seconds(10);
    constexpr Duration DEFAULT_CSI_RETRY_INTERVAL_MAX = Minutes(10);
    ```
    
    Then we can always introduce properly named member variables (possibly 
initialized from defaults) later.



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp
Line 1881 (original), 1893 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298074>

    This comment reads slightly confusing now as it doesn't refer to the 
`loop`'s `iterate` part, but just `getService`.
    
    How about
    ```
    Perform the call with the latest service future.
    ```



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp
Lines 1918 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298076>

    `cstdlib` for `RAND_MAX`.



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp
Lines 1920-1922 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298075>

    Does this actually increase the backoff every time? I guess the intention 
is that we pass a `mutable` backoff by value, and then increase it every time. 
I have the feeling this only works on the copy and doesn't propagate across 
iterations.
    
    I would have expected some function-local `shared_ptr` to a backoff which 
we'd pass by value into the `loop` body as `mutable` and can use to pass the 
value across iterations. Not sure there is a dedicated `loop` solution for this.



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp
Lines 1933 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298070>

    I don't follow the reasoning around using `default` here, and it also makes 
it intransparent which cases are not retried. I'd enumberate all 15 not retried 
cases (in which we also wouldn't have to worry about unintentionally not 
retried future status codes).



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp
Line 1901 (original), 1959 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298077>

    Do we want to include abandoned futures here?



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp
Line 2674 (original), 2739 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298078>

    Let's add a trailing comment here,
    ```
    // Retry.
    ```
    
    I guess the semantics are that we retry if we are handling a call triggered 
by an offer operation. Let's document that somewhere, e.g., in the commit 
message.



src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp
Line 2766 (original), 2831 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/#comment298079>

    Ditto.


- Benjamin Bannier


On Jan. 23, 2019, 8:10 a.m., Chun-Hung Hsiao wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 23, 2019, 8:10 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier, James DeFelice, Jie Yu, and Jan 
> Schlicht.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-9517
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-9517
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When the CSI plugin returns a retryable error (i.e., `DEADLINE_EXCEEDED`
> or `UNAVAILABLE`) for `CreateVolume` or `DeleteVolume` CSI calls, SLRP
> will now retry indefinitely with a random exponential backoff.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/csi/client.hpp 5d40d54c2abbd03993ce8835d37db23e209c7554 
>   src/csi/client.cpp 61ed410985099828a2f58b1527ab57daa4b379df 
>   src/resource_provider/storage/provider.hpp 
> 331f7b785b14b814c2889488effd53f3a48a1b95 
>   src/resource_provider/storage/provider.cpp 
> d6e20a549ede189c757ae3ae922ab7cb86d2be2c 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/69812/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> A unit test will be added later in the chain.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chun-Hung Hsiao
> 
>

Reply via email to