aurora-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Joe Smith" <yasumo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 32221: Remove excessively low timeout in SIGTERM swallowing test.
Date Wed, 01 Apr 2015 05:34:22 GMT


> On March 20, 2015, 3:52 p.m., Joe Smith wrote:
> >
> 
> Joe Smith wrote:
>     It seems like the `self.quitquitquit` is the important part (on line 340 of the runner)-
doesn't decreasing the timeout not give `quitquitquit` the time it needs?
> 
> Joe Smith wrote:
>     In `src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/thermos_task_runner.py`
>     
>     ```
>     331     waited = Amount(0, Time.SECONDS)                                        
                                                            
>     332     while self.is_alive and waited < timeout:                            
                                                               
>     333       self._clock.sleep(self.POLL_INTERVAL.as_(Time.SECONDS))               
                                                            
>     334       waited += self.POLL_INTERVAL                                          
                                                            
>     335                                                                             
                                                            
>     336     if not self.is_alive and self.task_state() != TaskState.ACTIVE:         
                                                            
>     337       return                                                                
                                                            
>     338                                                                             
                                                            
>     339     log.info('Thermos task did not shut down cleanly, rebinding to kill.')  
                                                            
>     340     self.quitquitquit()                                                     
                                                            
>     341                                                                             
                                                            
>     342     while not self._monitor.finished and waited < timeout:               
                                                               
>     343       self._clock.sleep(self.POLL_INTERVAL.as_(Time.SECONDS))               
                                                            
>     344       waited += self.POLL_INTERVAL  
>     ```
>     
>     Is it that we need to reset waited to Amount(0, Time.SECONDS) ?

friendly ping


- Joe


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/32221/#review77296
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 18, 2015, 6:20 p.m., Brian Wickman wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/32221/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 18, 2015, 6:20 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora and Bill Farner.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AURORA-1054
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1054
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Remove excessively low timeout in SIGTERM swallowing test.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/test/python/apache/aurora/executor/test_thermos_task_runner.py 6b24bbb2ab7ca16f97961aabeed945b61e5b5908

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32221/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Cannot reproduce locally, but 5 seconds is an impossibly small timeout, even if we aren't
testing SIGTERM swallowing.  If this fails, we will get tripped by 60s timeout instead.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brian Wickman
> 
>


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