Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.26.0 (rc3)

We found an issue with the v1 API, which is not completely on par with the legacy mesos.proto. Spinning RC4 shortly… > On Dec 7, 2015, at 10:48 AM, Bernd Mathiske wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Ubuntu 14 (clean without SSL, a few known flaky tests with SSL, all analyzed >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.26.0 (rc3)

+1 (binding) Ubuntu 14 (clean without SSL, a few known flaky tests with SSL, all analyzed and deemed non-blockers) CentOS 6.6 (a few known flaky tests with SSL, all analyzed and deemed non-blockers) > On Dec 4, 2015, at 4:52 AM, Benjamin Mahler wrote: > > +1

Re: Mesos at Moz

>From a quick skim, this looks excellent. Are there any plans to try getting the bamboo changes back upstream, or is it going to be a permanent fork? On Monday, December 7, 2015, Arunabha Ghosh wrote: > Hi Folks, > We, at Moz have been working for a while on

Re: Verifying Zero Downtime Upgrade Process For Existing Mesos Cluster

Hi Abishek, I would strongly advise not to skip 6 versions. It's hard to say whether there were any changes that will prevent 0.25 masters to talk to 0.19 slaves (my intuition says there were some breaking changes to protobufs). We do *not* support upgrade by skipping version, so please upgrade

Re: Task still 'active' after TASK_FINISHED status

The fact that the slave is retrying means that the TASK_FAILED status hasn't reached the master or the scheduler or the acknowledgement hasn't reached the slave. Since the master hasn't released the resources for the task (from what you say), I imagine it's the former. What do master logs say?

Mesos at Moz

Hi Folks, We, at Moz have been working for a while on RogerOS, our next gen application platform built on top of Mesos. We've reached a point in the project where we feel it's ready to share with the world :-) The blog posts introducing RogerOS can be found at

Re: Mesos at Moz

We're definitely open to merging the changes to Bamboo back upstream if the changes we made prove useful to Bamboo. The changes we made were pretty specific to our needs and we anticipate making quite a few changes as we evolve the platform, so a separate repo seemed to be a better idea till the

Re: Mesos at Moz

Thanks, Vinod. I'm not worried too much about scaling the core, you guys have done the hard work on that end :-). The other parts of the system can definitely run into issues when running at larger scales. We've some ideas about what these are and what the mitigation plan is. Others, of course

Re: Mesos at Moz

Really cool to see a multi-framework compute platform. Let us know how things work for you guys as you scale! On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Arunabha Ghosh wrote: > We're definitely open to merging the changes to Bamboo back upstream if > the changes we made prove useful

[VOTE] Release Apache Mesos 0.26.0 (rc4)

Hi friends, we had noticed some discrepancies between the V0 API and the V1 API, hence we had to create a new release candidate even after the voting of 0.26.0-rc3 had officially ended. Sorry for that! Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Mesos 0.26.0. The CHANGELOG for