---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/#review92462
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Jie Yu
On July 12, 2015, 4:47 a.m., Ian
On July 17, 2015, 1:36 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp, lines 637-643
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/3/?file=1009143#file1009143line637
No test for checkpointing???
I decided to punt this in this review. Will follow up with a test
On July 17, 2015, 1:36 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp, line 630
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/3/?file=1009143#file1009143line630
Hum, looks like a bug since, for example, slaveId is a reference and
will be invalid when the lambda is
On July 17, 2015, 1:36 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/provisioner.cpp, line 24
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/3/?file=1009145#file1009145line24
Where is this? This won't compile!
You're right it won't, wierd it compiled for me :( let's fix this!
- Timothy
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/#review92339
---
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp (lines 185 - 186)
On July 16, 2015, 6:36 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp, line 630
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/3/?file=1009143#file1009143line630
Hum, looks like a bug since, for example, slaveId is a reference and
will be invalid when the lambda is
On July 8, 2015, 11:34 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp, line 418
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/2/?file=989756#file989756line418
Is it possible for rootfs to not exist when we are here? If not, there
should be a CHECK and a comment
On July 14, 2015, 7:41 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/provisioner.cpp, lines 43-56
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/2-3/?file=989758#file989758line43
Why do you need foreach loop here if you were going to return error
anyway?
Timothy Chen wrote:
We
On May 28, 2015, 9:49 p.m., Paul Brett wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.hpp, line 245
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/1/?file=957263#file957263line245
To many underscores - can we come up with a better name?
We can refactor later.
- Timothy
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/#review92000
---
Tim, I probably wound wait for Vinod's shipit before committing
On July 14, 2015, 7:41 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/provisioner.cpp, lines 43-56
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/2-3/?file=989758#file989758line43
Why do you need foreach loop here if you were going to return error
anyway?
We need the foreach to go
On July 14, 2015, 7:41 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
can you fix the depends on please?
I think the two listed are the correct dependencies for this rb?
- Timothy
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
On July 8, 2015, 11:34 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
can you please set the dependency for this review correctly? it's hard to
understand which reviews introduced the code that this review depends on.
none of the dropped issues have comments. did you forget to hit publish on your
comments?
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/#review91662
---
can you fix the depends on please?
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/
---
(Updated July 10, 2015, 5:05 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Chi Zhang, Paul
On June 29, 2015, 7:41 p.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/provisioner.cpp, lines 46-47
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/2/?file=989758#file989758line46
Seems like this belongs to a later patch. AppcProvisioner is not
introduced yet.
+1
- Vinod
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/
---
(Updated July 7, 2015, 12:42 p.m.)
Review request for mesos, Chi Zhang, Paul
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/#review89975
---
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp (line 626)
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/#review89293
---
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.hpp (lines 319 - 320)
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/#review89227
---
include/mesos/slave/isolator.hpp (line 71)
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/
---
(Updated June 22, 2015, 9:44 a.m.)
Review request for mesos, Chi Zhang, Paul
On May 14, 2015, 12:41 p.m., Timothy Chen wrote:
src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp, line 193
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34137/diff/1/?file=957264#file957264line193
Not sure if I follow this logic or if I'm missing something, but the
provisioners hashmap seems to
22 matches
Mail list logo
