User story #2661
closed
Add a promise in common to prevent from too many cf-execd
Added by Nicolas PERRON almost 12 years ago. Updated over 11 years ago.
Description
In order to prevent a lot of cf-execd process (like #2654) or other process, we should add a new promise in common which check number of processes.
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Status changed from New to In progress
- Assignee changed from Jonathan CLARKE to Matthieu CERDA
I'm taking this :D
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Target version changed from 47 to 50
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Status changed from In progress to Pending technical review
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
Applied in changeset commit:829bd037cb1295585e5bccdc585c28f099814113.
Updated by Nicolas PERRON almost 12 years ago
- Why did you modified from "escaped_workdir" to "g.escaped_workdir" ?
- Shouldn't we return a success if the number of processes are OK ?
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
Nicolas PERRON wrote:
It seems OK to me but I have some questions:
- Why did you modified from "escaped_workdir" to "g.escaped_workdir" ?
Because the original declaration was working by miracle, and a small correction to make sure things work right is worth nothing. It is trivial, really.
- Shouldn't we return a success if the number of processes are OK ?
Well, I did not want to declare a new section in the metadata.xml as it is what we already did for some bundles. But it does not really make a difference to me, so if you think that an extra report is needed, I will add it gladly.
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Status changed from Pending technical review to Discussion
- Assignee changed from Matthieu CERDA to Nicolas PERRON
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Assignee changed from Nicolas PERRON to Jonathan CLARKE
<message deleted because it was unrelated to this issue>
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Assignee changed from Jonathan CLARKE to Nicolas PERRON
Updated by Jonathan CLARKE almost 12 years ago
- Assignee changed from Nicolas PERRON to Matthieu CERDA
- % Done changed from 100 to 70
Matthieu CERDA wrote:
Nicolas PERRON wrote:
It seems OK to me but I have some questions:
- Why did you modified from "escaped_workdir" to "g.escaped_workdir" ?
Because the original declaration was working by miracle, and a small correction to make sure things work right is worth nothing. It is trivial, really.
No, this is not trivial. It is a full blown bug, that should be reported as such, and affects all Windows machines. Please revert this change in this bug, and open a new ticket to trace it. However, it is well spotted, thanks!
- Shouldn't we return a success if the number of processes are OK ?
Well, I did not want to declare a new section in the metadata.xml as it is what we already did for some bundles. But it does not really make a difference to me, so if you think that an extra report is needed, I will add it gladly.
I agree, we should have a new section for reporting on this. Also, your result_error should be a result_repaired, since you killed the excess cf-execd(s), so you repaired the problem. It would good to have a success report as well, for the case that everything is fine.
Finally, why did you redefine a body "body process_count system_check_process_count" while there is an almost identical one in the stdlib called "body process_count check_range"? We should use stdlib definitions as far as possible.
Updated by Jonathan CLARKE almost 12 years ago
- Target version changed from 50 to 2.4.0~beta3
Updated by Nicolas CHARLES almost 12 years ago
Moreover, using the if_else result in having the class execd_is_tame defined if there's been a repair (killing all the processes)
And why are you sending term and kill, rather than using the process_stop to send a command to shut down more gracefully the executor ?
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Status changed from Discussion to In progress
As seen with NCH and JCL, we will rather define two steps instead of term/kill'ing the execd processes when 3 execd are detected: sigterm will be sent if there are 3 execd, and after 5 execd we will send sigkills.
Also, I will adjust the reporting.
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
- Status changed from In progress to Pending technical review
- % Done changed from 70 to 100
Applied in changeset commit:089d31e6351d7c30ba5ed78d4bb37f28d1391665.
Updated by Matthieu CERDA almost 12 years ago
Strange, Redmine sees the commit, but outputs a broken link...
Updated by Nicolas CHARLES almost 12 years ago
- Status changed from Pending technical review to 10
This looks valid, thank you Matthieu
Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 11 years ago
- Status changed from 10 to Released