-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/69869/#review212588
-----------------------------------------------------------



PASS: Mesos patch 69869 was successfully built and tested.

Reviews applied: `['69872', '69869']`

All the build artifacts available at: 
http://dcos-win.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com/artifacts/mesos-reviewbot-testing/2856/mesos-review-69869

- Mesos Reviewbot Windows


On Jan. 31, 2019, 1:38 a.m., Joseph Wu wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/69869/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 31, 2019, 1:38 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benno Evers, Gastón Kleiman, and Greg Mann.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-9542
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-9542
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The CREATE_DISK and DESTROY_DISK operations are "non-speculative"
> operations, which means the master must wait for the operations to
> complete successfully before the master can update its resources.
> Because the master must wait to update the results of non-speculative
> operations, it is possible for the framework making the
> CREATE/DESTROY_DISK to be torn down before the operation completes.
> 
> This commit adds a test to make sure the master can gracefully handle
> such a case.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/storage_local_resource_provider_tests.cpp 
> fb001aa8d32d1a0a03014a35772fe10b65ce8d9a 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/69869/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> The test currently fails with the exact message as MESOS-9542, which is the 
> intended behavior right now (we are discussing the fix).
> 
> src/mesos-tests 
> --gtest_filter="StorageLocalResourceProviderTest.FrameworkTeardownBeforeTerminalOperationStatusUpdate"
>  --verbose
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joseph Wu
> 
>

Reply via email to