Cool - I'll ping Joseph on that one. (the -1 from Nik was related to the known ROOT test issues that -if memory serves- we agreed were non-blocking: I'll follow up with him too)
*Marco Massenzio* *Distributed Systems Engineerhttp://codetrips.com <http://codetrips.com>* On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Vinod Kone <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
