Weekly Update

[Aditi Dixit <ad...@gmail.com>]

Hi all,

I've been working with Vinod on MESOS-703
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-703> as part of my Outreachy
internship.
Vinod suggested that it would be a good idea to send weekly updates to the
dev list so that all of you could get an idea of what I've been working on
and give me pointers and suggestions. So, the past week I did the following:

   - Sent a review request <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35687/> to add
   capabilities to state HTTP endpoint.
   - Investigated the difference between registration and re-registration
   by modifying no_executor_framework.cpp and test_framework.cpp and found out
   that re-registration only occurs when the master fails over. When the
   scheduler fails over, only registration occurs. (Thanks to Joris for
   explaining this!)
   - Sent a review request <https://reviews.apache.org/r/35797/> for
   updating frameworkinfo.capabilities on framework re-registration to support
   adding capabilities. This only updates the master, not the allocator.
   - I also talked with Adam and Till regarding exposing the FrameworkInfo
   as a whole in the state HTTP endpoint. They said that it wouldn't be a
   problem. So, I wanted to know what you guys think before sending out a
   ticket and working on it.


Regards,
Aditi

Re: Weekly Update

[Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com>]

While that would result in duplicate information in the JSON, I guess its
worth the tradeoff (new fields to FrameworkInfo will automatically show up
in the state.json). I also don't expect any scalability concerns.

SGTM.

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Aditi Dixit <ad...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Most of the FrameworkInfo fields are already exposed. What did you mean by
> > exposing it as a whole? Did you mean having a field in the JSON (say
> > "info") that uses the default Protobuf to JSON converter?
> >
>
> Yeah, that's exactly what I meant :)
>

Re: Weekly Update

[Aditi Dixit <ad...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Most of the FrameworkInfo fields are already exposed. What did you mean by
> exposing it as a whole? Did you mean having a field in the JSON (say
> "info") that uses the default Protobuf to JSON converter?
>

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant :)

Re: Weekly Update

[Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com>]

Thanks Aditi for the update!

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Aditi Dixit <ad...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>    - I also talked with Adam and Till regarding exposing the FrameworkInfo
>    as a whole in the state HTTP endpoint. They said that it wouldn't be a
>    problem. So, I wanted to know what you guys think before sending out a
>    ticket and working on it.
>


Most of the FrameworkInfo fields are already exposed. What did you mean by
exposing it as a whole? Did you mean having a field in the JSON (say
"info") that uses the default Protobuf to JSON converter?