Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12342200D06 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 21:42:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 10D741609B5; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:53 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 570551609BB for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 21:42:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 1216 invoked by uid 500); 25 Sep 2017 19:42:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact reviews-help@mesos.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: reviews@mesos.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list reviews@mesos.apache.org Received: (qmail 1189 invoked by uid 99); 25 Sep 2017 19:42:51 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id CDDAC1A3C42; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.999 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.999 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=2, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mMs2CxfYQg83; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id 61E225FB62; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from reviews.apache.org (unknown [10.41.0.12]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id B56E7E06C2; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from reviews-vm2.apache.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by reviews.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at reviews-vm2.apache.org) with ESMTP id 46B74C406D9; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:48 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="===============6582458823512793155==" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Review Request 62353: Added a master-registry backed resource provider manager registry. From: Benjamin Bannier To: Jie Yu , Jan Schlicht Cc: Benjamin Bannier , Mesos Reviewbot , mesos , Mesos Reviewbot Windows Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:48 -0000 Message-ID: <20170925194248.25180.71744@reviews-vm2.apache.org> X-ReviewBoard-URL: https://reviews.apache.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Sender: Benjamin Bannier X-ReviewGroup: mesos X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, OOF, AutoReply X-ReviewRequest-URL: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62353/ X-Sender: Benjamin Bannier References: <20170925102750.25180.32361@reviews-vm2.apache.org> In-Reply-To: <20170925102750.25180.32361@reviews-vm2.apache.org> X-ReviewBoard-Diff-For: src/resource_provider/registrar.cpp X-ReviewBoard-Diff-For: src/resource_provider/registrar.hpp Reply-To: Benjamin Bannier X-ReviewRequest-Repository: mesos archived-at: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:42:53 -0000 --===============6582458823512793155== MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62353/ ----------------------------------------------------------- (Updated Sept. 25, 2017, 9:42 p.m.) Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Jan Schlicht. Changes ------- Rebased. Repository: mesos Description ------- This patch adds an implementation of the resource provider registrar backed by the master's registrar. With that it becomes possible to persist resource provider manager state in a single master registrar, but use the narrowly defined resource provider registry. Diffs (updated) ----- src/master/registry.proto 362a9fab946e9fb0411df2277f7f3edbadccb61a src/resource_provider/registrar.hpp PRE-CREATION src/resource_provider/registrar.cpp PRE-CREATION src/tests/resource_provider_manager_tests.cpp 3bc56b51526e9dd188423f7349e74246c3295c77 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62353/diff/7/ Changes: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62353/diff/6-7/ Testing ------- `make check` Thanks, Benjamin Bannier --===============6582458823512793155==--