Thanks for the nudge Marco. There was a binding -1 from Niklas.
I'm planning to cut an RC2. The cherry picks I've selected so far are in MESOS-2562 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2562>. The only one I'm currently waiting on to get a resolution for is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3345. On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Marco Massenzio <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey guys, > > just a quick note to bring back the conversation on track to the 0.24-RC1 > release. > Is my understanding correct that there are currently no binding -1's? > > @Vinod: what do you think, are we good to release? > > Thanks! > > *Marco Massenzio* > > *Distributed Systems Engineerhttp://codetrips.com <http://codetrips.com>* > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Dario Rexin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> One more question. From the Mesos code it doesn’t look like events are >> being split or combined, so given I have a client that gives me access to >> the individual chunks, is it safe to assume that each chunk contains >> exactly one event? Because that would make parsing the events a lot easier >> for me. >> >> Thanks, >> Dario >> >> On Sep 1, 2015, at 8:42 AM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> Hi Vinod, >> >> thanks for the explanation, I got it now. >> >> Thanks, >> Dario >> >> On 31.08.2015, at 23:47, Vinod Kone <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I think you might be confused with the HTTP chunked encoding and RecordIO >> encoding. Most HTTP client libraries dechunk the stream before presenting >> it to the application. So the application needs to know the encoding of the >> dechunked data to be able to process it. >> >> In Mesos's case, the server (master here) can encode it in JSON or >> Protobuf. We wanted to have a consistent way to encode both these formats >> and Record-IO format was the one we settled on. Note that this format is >> also used by the Twitter streaming API >> <https://dev.twitter.com/streaming/overview/processing> (see delimited >> messages section). >> >> HTH, >> >> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Dario Rexin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Vino, >>> >>> On Aug 31, 2015, at 9:36 PM, Vinod Kone <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Dario, >>> >>> Can you test with "curl --no-buffer" option? Looks like your stdout >>> might be line-buffered. >>> >>> >>> that did the trick, thanks! >>> >>> >>> The reason we used record-io formatting is to be consistent in how we >>> stream protobuf and json encoded data. >>> >>> >>> How does simple chunked encoding prevent you from doing this? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Dario >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 2:04 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Anand, >>>> >>>> thanks for the explanation. I didn't think about the case when you have >>>> to split a message, now it makes sense. >>>> >>>> But the case I observed with curl is still weird. Even when splitting a >>>> message, it should still receive both parts almost at the same time. Do you >>>> have any idea why it could behave like this? >>>> >>>> On 28.08.2015, at 21:31, Anand Mazumdar <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dario, >>>> >>>> Most HTTP libraries/parsers ( including one that Mesos uses internally >>>> ) provide a way to specify a default size of each chunk. If a Mesos Event >>>> is too big , it would get split into smaller chunks and vice-versa. >>>> >>>> -anand >>>> >>>> On Aug 28, 2015, at 11:51 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> Anand, >>>> >>>> in the example from my first mail you can see that curl prints the size >>>> of a message and then waits for the next message and only when it receives >>>> that message it will print the prior message plus the size of the next >>>> message, but not the actual message. >>>> >>>> What's the benefit of encoding multiple messages in a single chunk? You >>>> could simply create a single chunk per event. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Dario >>>> >>>> On 28.08.2015, at 19:43, Anand Mazumdar <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dario, >>>> >>>> Can you shed a bit more light on what you still find puzzling about the >>>> CURL behavior after my explanation ? >>>> >>>> PS: A single HTTP chunk can have 0 or more Mesos (Scheduler API) >>>> Events. So in your example, the first chunk had complete information about >>>> the first “event”, followed by partial information about the subsequent >>>> event from another chunk. >>>> >>>> As for the benefit of using RecordIO format here, how else do you think >>>> we could have de-marcated two events in the response ? >>>> >>>> -anand >>>> >>>> >>>> On Aug 28, 2015, at 10:01 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> Anand, >>>> >>>> thanks for the explanation. I'm still a little puzzled why curl behaves >>>> so strange. I will check how other client behave as soon as I have a >>>> chance. >>>> >>>> Vinod, >>>> >>>> what exactly is the benefit of using recordio here? Doesn't it make the >>>> content-type somewhat wrong? If I send 'Accept: application/json' and >>>> receive 'Content-Type: application/json', I actually expect to receive only >>>> json in the message. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Dario >>>> >>>> On 28.08.2015, at 18:13, Vinod Kone <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm happy to add the "\n" after the event (note it's different from >>>> chunk) if that makes CURL play nicer. I'm not sure about the "\r" part >>>> though? Is that a nice to have or does it have some other benefit? >>>> >>>> The design doc is not set in the stone since this has not been released >>>> yet. So definitely want to do the right/easy thing. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Anand Mazumdar <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dario, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the detailed explanation and for trying out the new API. >>>>> However, this is not a bug. The output from CURL is the encoding used by >>>>> Mesos for the events stream. From the user doc >>>>> <https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/scheduler_http_api.md> >>>>> : >>>>> >>>>> *"Master encodes each Event in RecordIO format, i.e., string >>>>> representation of length of the event in bytes followed by JSON or binary >>>>> Protobuf (possibly compressed) encoded event. Note that the value of >>>>> length will never be ‘0’ and the size of the length will be the size of >>>>> unsigned integer (i.e., 64 bits). Also, note that the RecordIO encoding >>>>> should be decoded by the scheduler whereas the underlying HTTP chunked >>>>> encoding is typically invisible at the application (scheduler) layer.“* >>>>> >>>>> If you run CURL with tracing enabled i.e. —trace, the output would be >>>>> something similar to this: >>>>> >>>>> <= Recv header, 2 bytes (0x2) >>>>> 0000: 0d 0a .. >>>>> <= Recv data, 115 bytes (0x73) >>>>> 0000: 36 64 0d 0a 31 30 35 0a 7b 22 73 75 62 73 63 72 6d..105.{"subscr >>>>> 0010: 69 62 65 64 22 3a 7b 22 66 72 61 6d 65 77 6f 72 ibed":{"framewor >>>>> 0020: 6b 5f 69 64 22 3a 7b 22 76 61 6c 75 65 22 3a 22 k_id":{"value":" >>>>> 0030: 32 30 31 35 30 38 32 35 2d 31 30 33 30 31 38 2d 20150825-103018- >>>>> 0040: 33 38 36 33 38 37 31 34 39 38 2d 35 30 35 30 2d 3863871498-5050- >>>>> 0050: 31 31 38 35 2d 30 30 31 30 22 7d 7d 2c 22 74 79 1185-0010"}},"ty >>>>> 0060: 70 65 22 3a 22 53 55 42 53 43 52 49 42 45 44 22 pe":"SUBSCRIBED" >>>>> 0070: 7d 0d 0a }.. >>>>> <others >>>>> >>>>> In the output above, the chunks are correctly delimited by ‘CRLF' (0d >>>>> 0a) as per the HTTP RFC. As mentioned earlier, the output that you observe >>>>> on stdout with CURL is of the Record-IO encoding used for the events >>>>> stream >>>>> ( and is not related to the RFC ): >>>>> >>>>> event = event-size LF >>>>> event-data >>>>> >>>>> Looking forward to more bug reports as you try out the new API ! >>>>> >>>>> -anand >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 28, 2015, at 12:56 AM, Dario Rexin <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> -1 (non-binding) >>>>> >>>>> I found a breaking bug in the new HTTP API. The messages do not >>>>> conform to the HTTP standard for chunked transfer encoding. in RFC 2616 >>>>> Sec. 3 (http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec3.html) a >>>>> chunk is defined as: >>>>> >>>>> chunk = chunk-size [ chunk-extension ] CRLF >>>>> chunk-data CRLF >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The HTTP API currently sends a chunk as: >>>>> >>>>> chunk = chunk-size LF >>>>> chunk-data >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> A standard conform HTTP client like curl can’t correctly interpret the >>>>> data as a complete chunk. In curl it currently looks like this: >>>>> >>>>> 104 >>>>> >>>>> {"subscribed":{"framework_id":{"value":"20150820-114552-16777343-5050-43704-0000"}},"type":"SUBSCRIBED"}20 >>>>> {"type":"HEARTBEAT”}666 >>>>> …. waiting … >>>>> >>>>> {"offers":{"offers":[{"agent_id":{"value":"20150820-114552-16777343-5050-43704-S0"},"framework_id":{"value":"20150820-114552-16777343-5050-43704-0000"},"hostname":"localhost","id":{"value":"20150820-114552-16777343-5050-43704-O0"},"resources":[{"name":"cpus","role":"*","scalar":{"value":8},"type":"SCALAR"},{"name":"mem","role":"*","scalar":{"value":15360},"type":"SCALAR"},{"name":"disk","role":"*","scalar":{"value":2965448},"type":"SCALAR"},{"name":"ports","ranges":{"range":[{"begin":31000,"end":32000}]},"role":"*","type":"RANGES"}],"url":{"address":{"hostname":"localhost","ip":"127.0.0.1","port":5051},"path":"\/slave(1)","scheme":"http"}}]},"type":"OFFERS”}20 >>>>> … waiting … >>>>> {"type":"HEARTBEAT”}20 >>>>> … waiting … >>>>> >>>>> It will receive a couple of messages after successful registration >>>>> with the master and the last thing printed is a number (in this case 666). >>>>> Then after some time it will print the first offers message followed by >>>>> the >>>>> number 20. The explanation for this behavior is, that curl can’t interpret >>>>> the data it gets from Mesos as a complete chunk and waits for the missing >>>>> data. So it prints what it thinks is a chunk (a message followed by the >>>>> size of the next messsage) and keeps the rest of the message until another >>>>> message arrives and so on. The fix for this is to terminate both lines, >>>>> the >>>>> message size and the message data, with CRLF. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Dario >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >
