Skip to content

Revert "[manager/scheduler] Ignore unassigned tasks with desired state beyond running." [WIP]#2710

Closed
anshulpundir wants to merge 1 commit into
moby:masterfrom
anshulpundir:rev
Closed

Revert "[manager/scheduler] Ignore unassigned tasks with desired state beyond running." [WIP]#2710
anshulpundir wants to merge 1 commit into
moby:masterfrom
anshulpundir:rev

Conversation

@anshulpundir
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@anshulpundir anshulpundir commented Jul 17, 2018

This reverts commit e3fcf6d.(#2574)

This is likely the root cause for #2705

@GordonTheTurtle
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Please sign your commits following these rules:
https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#sign-your-work
The easiest way to do this is to amend the last commit:

$ git clone -b "rev" git@github.com:anshulpundir/swarmkit.git somewhere
$ cd somewhere
$ git commit --amend -s --no-edit
$ git push -f

Amending updates the existing PR. You DO NOT need to open a new one.

…e beyond running."

This reverts commit e3fcf6d.

Signed-off-by: Anshul Pundir <anshul.pundir@docker.com>
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented Jul 17, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #2710 into master will decrease coverage by 0.1%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2710      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   61.89%   61.79%   -0.11%     
==========================================
  Files         134      134              
  Lines       21771    21769       -2     
==========================================
- Hits        13476    13452      -24     
- Misses       6836     6864      +28     
+ Partials     1459     1453       -6

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

can we / should we write an (e2e) test based on
#2705 to verify the behavior. and prevent regressions?

@anshulpundir anshulpundir changed the title Revert "[manager/scheduler] Ignore unassigned tasks with desired state beyond running." Revert "[manager/scheduler] Ignore unassigned tasks with desired state beyond running." [WIP] Jul 17, 2018
@anshulpundir
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

can we / should we write an (e2e) test based on
#2705 to verify the behavior. and prevent regressions?

I am going to try to add a unit-test that verifies the expected scheduler behavior.

@anshulpundir
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

This is likely the root cause for #2705

Not the root cause. Actual root cause is captured in #2705

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants