----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/70730/#review215590 -----------------------------------------------------------
Fix it, then Ship it! Ideally this should go in an allocator related header e.g. allocator/utils.hpp? As it stands it seems a bit too allocator specific due to the randomness to be exposed this broadly. src/tests/resources_tests.cpp Lines 1908-1911 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/70730/#comment302326> Shouldn't we also test the random choice logic? - Benjamin Mahler On May 29, 2019, 4:08 p.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/70730/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 29, 2019, 4:08 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Andrei Sekretenko and Benjamin Mahler. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This reduce the clutter in the allocator code. > Also added dedicated unit tests. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/common/resources_utils.hpp 42b6cafa3dbcdcce67690dd359c4aecb517ffd1d > src/common/resources_utils.cpp 3786bcf3ab61048c3a92e41acb4e43fd787d54f8 > src/master/allocator/mesos/hierarchical.cpp > 40c8363afddccdd5275ca06318a8cc2cc6fa21af > src/tests/resources_tests.cpp dbae0f6d7832a941cd04f3d76493f3e486c3909b > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/70730/diff/2/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > Benchmark result in r/70731/ > > > Thanks, > > Meng Zhu > >
