couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filipe David Manana <fdman...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [2/8] git commit: Fixing the replicator_db JS test
Date Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:18:14 GMT
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Filipe David Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:18 AM,  <davisp@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Fixing the replicator_db JS test
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/couchdb/repo
>>>> Commit: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/couchdb/commit/6c976bd9
>>>> Tree: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/couchdb/tree/6c976bd9
>>>> Diff: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/couchdb/diff/6c976bd9
>>>>
>>>> Branch: refs/heads/master
>>>> Commit: 6c976bd948565305c006746f449dc8cd21a749e1
>>>> Parents: 7d2fe95
>>>> Author: Paul Joseph Davis <davisp@apache.org>
>>>> Authored: Mon Mar 26 15:17:02 2012 -0500
>>>> Committer: Paul Joseph Davis <davisp@apache.org>
>>>> Committed: Wed Apr 25 16:54:08 2012 -0500
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>  share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js        |    4 ++++
>>>>  src/couch_replicator/src/couch_replicator.erl |    5 ++++-
>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/couchdb/blob/6c976bd9/share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> diff --git a/share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js b/share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js
>>>> index 48ca341..edc85f4 100644
>>>> --- a/share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js
>>>> +++ b/share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js
>>>> @@ -1076,6 +1076,10 @@ couchTests.replicator_db = function(debug) {
>>>>     });
>>>>     TEquals(200, xhr.status);
>>>>
>>>> +    // Temporary band-aid, give the replicator db some
>>>> +    // time to make the switch
>>>> +    wait(500);
>>>> +
>>>>     new_doc = {
>>>>       _id: "foo666",
>>>>       value: 666
>>>>
>>>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/couchdb/blob/6c976bd9/src/couch_replicator/src/couch_replicator.erl
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> diff --git a/src/couch_replicator/src/couch_replicator.erl b/src/couch_replicator/src/couch_replicator.erl
>>>> index 1f7c08a..e91e1ae 100644
>>>> --- a/src/couch_replicator/src/couch_replicator.erl
>>>> +++ b/src/couch_replicator/src/couch_replicator.erl
>>>> @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ async_replicate(#rep{id = {BaseId, Ext}, source = Src,
target = Tgt} = Rep) ->
>>>>         RepChildId,
>>>>         {gen_server, start_link, [?MODULE, Rep, [{timeout, Timeout}]]},
>>>>         temporary,
>>>> -        1,
>>>> +        250,
>>>>         worker,
>>>>         [?MODULE]
>>>>     },
>>>> @@ -333,6 +333,9 @@ do_init(#rep{options = Options, id = {BaseId, Ext}} =
Rep) ->
>>>>     }.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +handle_info(shutdown, St) ->
>>>> +    {stop, shutdown, St};
>>>> +
>>>>  handle_info({'DOWN', Ref, _, _, Why}, #rep_state{source_monitor = Ref}
= St) ->
>>>>     ?LOG_ERROR("Source database is down. Reason: ~p", [Why]),
>>>>     {stop, source_db_down, St};
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Never had an issue there. What was the problem? I have the feeling it
>>> may be related to
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1461
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> Afaik Paul's changes are to increase the shutdown time (from 1ms to
>> 250ms) and to avoid the noisy OTP error messages when a running
>> replication is cancelled (shutdown handle_info clause).
>> However I would be highly surprised if it fixes the issue you reported.
>
> I understand the change, but I don't know what is the problem . I may
> have misinterpreted what was the switch in question. But this is quite
> similar since stopping (deleting a doc) or canceling are both calling
> the same function, aren't they?

Right. But the issue you reported before is unrelated. The problem
there is that 2 processes are calling 2 functions of the same
supervisor (start_child and delete_child). Those supervisor functions
are synchronous, meaning that one has to wait for the other to finish.

>
> - benoît



-- 
Filipe David Manana,

"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
 Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
 That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."

Mime
View raw message