mesos-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niklas Nielsen" <...@qni.dk>
Subject Re: Review Request 18403: Added support for launching tasks by TaskInfo.
Date Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:04:56 GMT


> On March 19, 2014, 12:45 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/slave/slave.cpp, lines 1081-1083
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18403/diff/5/?file=522999#file522999line1081>
> >
> >     Why is this a CHECK? What guarantees a framework will not be removed?
> 
> Niklas Nielsen wrote:
>     CHECK Should indeed be dropped. I don't think it is much different from the entry
to killTask(); should we just ignore in _killTask with a warning instead (like in killTask)?

Ping :)


> On March 19, 2014, 12:45 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > src/slave/slave.cpp, lines 3576-3588
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18403/diff/5/?file=522999#file522999line3576>
> >
> >     So the checkpointing of executor info is now being done after it is launched.
So if a slave restarts before finalize() gets called there is no way to recover this info
and inform the master. This is probably ok if the master stays up because the state will be
reconciled when the slave re-registers. If the master also fails over then all bets are off
and no one knows about the lost task/executor. This is unfortunate but I guess no different
than if the slave restarted when the task was launched. Lets add a test for this.
> 
> Niklas Nielsen wrote:
>     You bet - sounds like a great idea. I'll work on it.

So just to clarify (and to get some input on how the test would work): This would involve
imitating a launch which doesn't get to return an executor info in time before a fail-over
happens?


- Niklas


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/18403/#review37753
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 28, 2014, 1:34 p.m., Niklas Nielsen wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/18403/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 28, 2014, 1:34 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ian Downes and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-922
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-922
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This patch delegates the choice of executor to the containerizer by removing executorInfo
dependencies up until Containerizer::launch().
> Containerizer::launch() now returns a future to the executor info that is being run and
the slave creates the corresponding executor structure when launch completes.
> This means message handling from the running executor to the slave in the interim where
the executor structure has not created, need to be enqueued until executor is ready.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/containerizer/containerizer.hpp d9ae326 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos_containerizer.hpp ee1fd30 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos_containerizer.cpp c819c97 
>   src/slave/slave.hpp 15e23ce 
>   src/slave/slave.cpp 6d901dc 
>   src/tests/containerizer.hpp a9f1531 
>   src/tests/containerizer.cpp bfb9341 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18403/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Niklas Nielsen
> 
>


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