---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19833/
---
(Updated April 1, 2014, 9:57 p.m.)
Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19888/#review39207
---
Isn't a StorageBackfill what you're after here? Rewrite tasks in
On April 1, 2014, 10:43 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
Isn't a StorageBackfill what you're after here? Rewrite tasks in the
UNKNOWN state to a more appropriate state?
The StorageBackfill is a much more invasive approach, which is not really
required here. Besides, rewriting state would mess
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19833/#review39208
---
Looks great overall! Last request - can you push a branch to
On April 1, 2014, 10:43 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
Isn't a StorageBackfill what you're after here? Rewrite tasks in the
UNKNOWN state to a more appropriate state?
Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
The StorageBackfill is a much more invasive approach, which is not really
required here.
On April 1, 2014, 10:43 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
Isn't a StorageBackfill what you're after here? Rewrite tasks in the
UNKNOWN state to a more appropriate state?
Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
The StorageBackfill is a much more invasive approach, which is not really
required here.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19888/
---
(Updated April 2, 2014, 12:05 a.m.)
Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19888/#review39220
---
Ship it!
On March 28, 2014, 1:46 p.m., Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
src/test/sh/org/apache/aurora/e2e/test_end_to_end_v2.sh, line 43
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19788/diff/1/?file=539838#file539838line43
Why not pushd once instead?
Mark Chu-Carroll wrote:
Don't follow the question. What
