attempted dif -u for some store changes...........
bb_store.c
@@ -484,33 +435,32 @@
long end, pos;
if (filename == NULL)
- return 0;
-
+ return 0;
mutex_lock(file_mutex);
if (file != NULL) {
- fclose(file);
- file = NULL;
+ fclose(file);
+ file = NULL;
}
store_file = octstr_read_file(octstr_get_cstr(filename));
- if (store_file != NULL && octstr_len(store_file)!=0)
- info(0, "Loading store file `%s'",
octstr_get_cstr(filename));
+ if (store_file != NULL)
+ info(0, "Loading store file `%s'", octstr_get_cstr(filename));
else {
- store_file = octstr_read_file(octstr_get_cstr(newfile));
- if (store_file != NULL && octstr_len(store_file)!=0)
- info(0, "Loading store file `%s'",
octstr_get_cstr(newfile));
- else {
- store_file =
octstr_read_file(octstr_get_cstr(bakfile));
- if (store_file != NULL)
- info(0, "Loading store file `%s'",
octstr_get_cstr(bakfile));
- else {
- info(0, "Cannot open any store file,
starting a new one");
- retval = open_file(filename);
- mutex_unlock(file_mutex);
- return retval;
- }
- }
+ store_file = octstr_read_file(octstr_get_cstr(newfile));
+ if (store_file != NULL)
+ info(0, "Loading store file `%s'", octstr_get_cstr(newfile));
+ else {
+ store_file = octstr_read_file(octstr_get_cstr(bakfile));
+ if (store_file != NULL)
+ info(0, "Loading store file `%s'",
octstr_get_cstr(bakfile));
+ else {
+ info(0, "Cannot open any store file, starting a new one");
+ retval = open_file(filename);
+ mutex_unlock(file_mutex);
+ return retval;
+ }
+ }
}
info(0, "Store-file size %ld, starting to unpack%s",
octstr_len(store_file),
@@ -522,33 +472,33 @@
while ((end = octstr_search_char(store_file, '\n', pos)) != -1) {
- pack = octstr_copy(store_file, pos, end-pos);
- pos = end+1;
+ pack = octstr_copy(store_file, pos, end-pos);
+ pos = end+1;
+
+ if (octstr_url_decode(pack) == -1) {
+ debug("bb.store", 0, "Garbage at store-file, skipped");
+ octstr_destroy(pack);
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ msg = msg_unpack(pack);
+ octstr_destroy(pack);
+ if (msg == NULL) {
+ continue;
+ }
- if (octstr_url_decode(pack) == -1) {
- debug("bb.store", 0, "Garbage at store-file,
skipped");
- octstr_destroy(pack);
- continue;
- }
-
- msg = msg_unpack(pack);
- octstr_destroy(pack);
- if (msg == NULL) {
- continue;
- }
-
- if (msg_type(msg) == sms) {
- store_to_dict(msg);
- msgs++;
- }
- else if (msg_type(msg) == ack) {
- store_to_dict(msg);
- } else {
- warning(0, "Strange message in store-file,
discarded, "
- "dump follows:");
- msg_dump(msg, 0);
- msg_destroy(msg);
- }
+ if (msg_type(msg) == sms) {
+ store_to_dict(msg);
+ msgs++;
+ }
+ else if (msg_type(msg) == ack) {
+ store_to_dict(msg);
+ } else {
+ warning(0, "Strange message in store-file, discarded, "
+ "dump follows:");
+ msg_dump(msg, 0);
+ msg_destroy(msg);
+ }
}
octstr_destroy(store_file);
@@ -632,25 +582,20 @@
sms_dict = dict_create(201, msg_destroy_item);
if (dump_freq > 0)
- dump_frequency = dump_freq;
+ dump_frequency = dump_freq;
else
- dump_frequency = BB_STORE_DEFAULT_DUMP_FREQ;
+ dump_frequency = BB_STORE_DEFAULT_DUMP_FREQ;
file_mutex = mutex_create();
- return 0;
-}
-
-
-void store_start(void)
-{
active = 1;
if ((cleanup_thread = gwthread_create(store_dumper, NULL))==-1)
- panic(0, "Failed to create a cleanup thread!");
-
+ panic(0, "Failed to create a cleanup thread!");
+ return 0;
}
bearerbox.c
@@ -606,23 +579,18 @@
gwthread_sleep(5.0); /* give time to threads to register themselves */
if (store_load()== -1)
- panic(0, "Cannot start with store-file failing");
-
+ panic(0, "Cannot start with store-file failing");
- /* start the store file thread*/
- store_start();
-
sorry, looks a mess, essentially the store dumper thread is not started in
the store_init,
but later in store_start()
----- Original Message -----
From: "fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "devel" <[email protected]>; "Alexander Malysh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: store files - store_load -#- MailID:PAAA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alexander Malysh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 11:50 PM
> Subject: Re: store files - store_load -#- MailID:PAAA
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > fred wrote:
> > > Hi devel groupers
> > >
> > >
> > > I have been testing with a few fail scenarios lately, and the way the
> > > code is currently doesn;t
> > > quite do it for me, strange because much of the way its coded has been
> > > like that for quite some time......
> > >
> > > 1.) Firstly during init_bearerbox, the store_init - which starts up
the
> > > store_dumper thread,
> > > which has a tendency to run the store_dump() and thus do_dump and
rename
> > > the say
> > > "kannel.store" to "kannel.store.bak"
> > > and the new store is renamed to "kannel.store"
> >
> > you are right, it's a race condition here (but unfortunately not only
> > one in store-file support)...
> >
> > >
> > > 2.) now the store_load() is run, the "kannel.store" now read is
> > > typically 0 length
> > > I have actually changed the code to like
> > > if (store_file != NULL && octstr_len(store_file)!=0)
> > > info(0, "Loading store file `%s'", octstr_get_cstr(filename));
> > > else {
> > > store_file = octstr_read_file(octstr_get_cstr(newfile));
> > > so it gets to "kannel.store.bak" and loads these messages,
> >
> > it's workaround but not properly fix.
> agree, which is why the following is best
> >
> >
> > >
> > > 3.) however, rationally I think the order of how its happening is all
> > > wrong, and would rather have
> > > store_load as deterministically being the first thing to run which is
> > > how i am changing it to.
> > >
> >
> > the order is not wrong. Only thing that I would change, is: start dumper
> > thread after store_load completed, means at the and of store_load
> function.
>
> Yes, thats what I meant and did and works much better.
>
>
> >
> > > 4.) theres a few other things i'm going to say about message
> > > acknowledgement...but I'll make that another subject
> > > ITNTDF
> >
> > hmm, interesting to hear about...
> >
> > >
> > > I would like to know what current scenario of recovery the existing
code
> > > has been tested for..??? anyone?
> > >
> >
> > it was tested for most cases but it's not bug free! I personally know
> > some strange race conditions within store-file support that not too hard
> > to fix and will be fixed as soon I have time for it hopefully by the end
> > of this week :-) In the meantime you could test my new store spool
> > replacement that was posted to this list.
> >
> > > Anyway.......I written this stuff here so you can comment on what I
> > > said......I changed stuff anyway for our version........
> >
> > hmm, it's open source if you still didn't get it... so patch is
welcome...
>
> hmm,yeh but making a diff -u that will make sense to you is a bit of a
> problem...after
> doing custom stuff, and I tend to reformat the code in places I need to be
> able to read and follow it.
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
