aurora-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Farner" <wfar...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Review Request 38385: Documenting dedicated job & quota relationship.
Date Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:51:27 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/#review99136
-----------------------------------------------------------


Overall content LGTM.  Mostly nits about organization, and a request for a new section to
raise the preemption topic to a more prominent location.


docs/client-commands.md (line 335)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/#comment156014>

    Please linkify `dedicated`, that would go a long way to point towards context.  A quick
skim turnedt his up as a potential target: https://github.com/apache/aurora/blob/master/docs/deploying-aurora-scheduler.md#dedicated-attribute



docs/configuration-reference.md (line 327)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/#comment156018>

    Not sure why we had the 'warning' in the first place, but i think it should be removed.
 There isn't really any harm that warrants that tone.  Second - the note about preemption
would be _great_ in a separate mini-section near 'Resource Quota'.  With that, you can trim
this down quite a bit:
    
    > Indicated whether this is a production job that will be preferred for preemption
[link].
    
    Then the new preemption section can draw the connection to quota.



docs/configuration-tutorial.md (line 583)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/#comment156019>

    Woah, this is a new doc to me...seems significantly redundant with configuration-reference.md.
 All the more point to trim this down and point off to prose about preemption/quota.  Mind
filing a ticket to make these two docs less redundant?



docs/deploying-aurora-scheduler.md (line 212)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/#comment156016>

    I think it's fine to omit this and let the 'Resource Quota' section stand on its own.
 Without a pointer to context, this is difficult to piece together.  Perhaps this:
    
    > See the section about resource quotas [link] to learn how quotas apply to dedicated
jobs.



docs/resource-isolation.md (line 150)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/#comment156015>

    This doc is otherewise about machine-level resource isolation, so it seems like an odd
match here.  It seems to align well with content in this page: docs/deploying-aurora-scheduler.md.


- Bill Farner


On Sept. 15, 2015, 5:14 p.m., Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 15, 2015, 5:14 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora and Bill Farner.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AURORA-1462
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1462
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Documenting dedicated job & quota relationship.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   docs/client-commands.md f91e5df0c19104a961aa9955478bf2d37a2aa7b6 
>   docs/configuration-reference.md ad2701cadd38bb2fdbbe2acc477038986f8ec733 
>   docs/configuration-tutorial.md d6e7c352e16964e19a41340cb03a016620c17f7d 
>   docs/deploying-aurora-scheduler.md 8db0e615b6abe6865a889dbcfb24271655caaee6 
>   docs/resource-isolation.md 7e8d88d09093d85c07c84bd3d6476fc89ff21c3b 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38385/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Private remote: https://github.com/maxim111333/incubator-aurora/tree/quota_dedicated_docs/docs
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Maxim Khutornenko
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message