-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 66
Remove health check and "bad" node concept from ClusterManager #132
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
dandavison
wants to merge
5
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
remove-polling-in-loop-from-cluster-manager
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c0e27a6
Remove health check and "bad" node concept
dandavison 7ec0e72
Remove unnecessary control logic and otherwise simplify main loop
dandavison e3eba6e
Reinstate loop
dandavison d934ee1
Wait all handlers finished before CAN
dandavison ab9b2f9
Update SDK version
dandavison File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I will say this is a bit confusing to a user that may not understand tasks and how nodes lock is done. And I may have been wrong about removing the loop. Basically the interesting question is "can you guarantee if
should_continue_as_new()
isTrue
in the wait condition lambda, that it is alsoTrue
here? The only way it could becomeTrue
in wait condition butFalse
here is ifnodes_lock
went from unlocked to locked in the interim. Thenodes_lock
does not surround the entire handlers, it's only after cluster started, and we don't really provide known coroutine ordering (only deterministic ordering).Take this scenario:
should_continue_as_new
wait condition is true becausenodes_lock
is not locked, and cluster started is true)should_continue_as_new()
isFalse
May need the loop back or split the cluster shutdown and should continue as new wait conditions to separate tasks so you know which completed.
Another scenario, what if steps 4 and 5 above switch? What if this workflow thinks it should continue as new but then as coroutines settle post-completion the update runs. We'll continue as new in the middle of its activities. This needs that new
all_handlers_finished
thing I think.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, I'm trying to move too quickly here. Reinstated loop, and added wait for
all_handlers_finished()
before CAN. It would be ideal to add some tests exercising CAN.