mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Mann <g...@mesosphere.io>
Subject Re: Review Request 66220: Added test for `GROW_VOLUME` and `SHRINK_VOLUME` operations.
Date Fri, 13 Apr 2018 16:43:11 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#review201109
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 455-459 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282073>

    Is this enforced somewhere in validation code? Can we check for expected behavior when
a GROW/SHRINK operation is submitted for a MOUNT volume, rather than simply returning?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 471-479 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282074>

    Nit: could you group all of the agent dependencies together?
    i.e.
    ```
      Future<UpdateSlaveMessage> updateSlaveMessage =
          FUTURE_PROTOBUF(UpdateSlaveMessage(), _, _);
    
      slave::Flags slaveFlags = CreateSlaveFlags();
      slaveFlags.resources = getSlaveResources();
    
      Owned<MasterDetector> detector = master.get()->createDetector();
    
      Try<Owned<cluster::Slave>> slave = StartSlave(detector.get(), slaveFlags);
      ASSERT_SOME(slave);
    ```



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 492 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282078>

    Is this necessary? Since the clock is paused, is it really possible that we'll get more
offers than expected?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 496 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282076>

    Could you move this to the top of the test to make it clearer that we will have the clock
paused for the whole test?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 541-542 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282080>

    Is this `Future` necessary? Since the task consumes the volume, it may be sufficient to
await on the task status updates?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 542 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282077>

    Indented too far.



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 549 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282079>

    Is this necessary?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 553-554 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282081>

    Is this necessary? Awaiting on the task status updates may be sufficient?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 557 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282082>

    Suggestion: you could use the `TaskStatusTaskIdEq` matcher in the `EXPECT_CALL(sched,
statusUpdate(&driver, _))` call to avoid these expectations for the task ID.



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 597-603 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282084>

    I'm not sure if these expectations are necessary - perhaps it's sufficient to confirm
that the subsequent offer contains a volume of the expected size?
    
    Ditto for the `shrinkVolumeMessage` below.



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 613 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282083>

    Is this comment correct? Won't this offer contain the grown volume?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 634-636 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282087>

    I think these should be indented two more spaces.



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 657-658 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282088>

    Is this necessary?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 668 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282091>

    Is this necessary?



src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp
Lines 680 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/#comment282075>

    Is this necessary?


- Greg Mann


On April 11, 2018, 9:19 p.m., Zhitao Li wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 11, 2018, 9:19 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Chun-Hung Hsiao, Gaston Kleiman, and Greg Mann.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4965
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4965
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added test for `GROW_VOLUME` and `SHRINK_VOLUME` operations.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/tests/persistent_volume_tests.cpp 4edf781711d9efdb994114aeb6289b6af750b87a 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66220/diff/4/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Zhitao Li
> 
>


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