Re: Review Request 39518: Changed write api.

2015-10-23 Thread Jojy Varghese
> On Oct. 23, 2015, 8:02 a.m., Timothy Chen wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/provisioner/docker/registry_client.cpp, line 638 > > > > > > Did we ever find out why before we just use another interface? I realized

Re: Review Request 39518: Changed write api.

2015-10-23 Thread Jojy Varghese
> On Oct. 23, 2015, 7:59 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/provisioner/docker/registry_client.cpp, line 642 > > > > > > Wouldn't this potentially cause data loss if the called `write` > >

Re: Review Request 39518: Changed write api.

2015-10-23 Thread Benjamin Bannier
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39518/#review103739 --- src/slave/containerizer/provisioner/docker/registry_client.cpp

Re: Review Request 39518: Changed write api.

2015-10-23 Thread Timothy Chen
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39518/#review103740 --- src/slave/containerizer/provisioner/docker/registry_client.cpp

Re: Review Request 39518: Changed write api.

2015-10-21 Thread Mesos ReviewBot
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39518/#review103480 --- Patch looks great! Reviews applied: [39518] All tests passed. -