Aha, docs in the proto file confirm my read of the implementation:
// A health check for the task (currently in *alpha* and initial
> // support will only be for TaskInfo's that have a CommandInfo).
> optional HealthCheck health_check = 8;
-=Bill
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Bill Far
To answer OP:
(1) seems perfectly reasonable, i don't foresee any pitfalls
(2) seems reasonable as well. Thrift unions help a bit here. Just
spitballing, but this general arrangement comes to mind:
struct TcpCheck {
...
}
struct HttpStatusCheck {
...
}
struct HttpPayloadCheck {
...
}
If i'm reading the code correctly, the only way to use mesos' health checks
is with the command executor? Can somebody check my work on that?
Some other context around health checks to keep in mind:
- there is a review [1] in-flight for the executor to delay the transition
to RUNNING until the fi
Hi Florian,
have you looked at what Mesos is already offering out of the box [1]? Maybe
there is a way to implement your features by relying on Mesos directly, instead
of making the Aurora implementation more flexible.
As you've mentioned, the lifecycle endpoints abort and quit seem to be qui
