rabbah commented on a change in pull request #3132: Separate container removal
from job completion.
URL:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3132#discussion_r159195767
##########
File path:
core/invoker/src/main/scala/whisk/core/containerpool/ContainerProxy.scala
##########
@@ -248,16 +250,20 @@ class ContainerProxy(
// Sending the message to self on a failure will cause the message
// to ultimately be sent back to the parent (which will retry it)
// when container removal is done.
- case Failure(_) => self ! job
+ case Failure(_) =>
+ rescheduleJob = true
+ self ! job
}
.flatMap(_ => initializeAndRun(data.container, job))
.map(_ => WarmedData(data.container, job.msg.user.namespace,
job.action, Instant.now))
.pipeTo(self)
goto(Running)
- // timeout or removing
- case Event(StateTimeout | Remove, data: WarmedData) =>
destroyContainer(data.container)
+ // container is reclaimed by the pool or it has become too old
+ case Event(StateTimeout | Remove, data: WarmedData) =>
+ rescheduleJob = true // to supress sending message to the pool and not
double count
+ destroyContainer(data.container)
Review comment:
If a container is reclaimed because of a timeout only, it does not reflect a
change in the pool the capacity. It is sufficient to instruct the parent to
remove the container from it?s free pool.
What do you mean by it?s not guaranteed that the job is rescheduled in case
of a timeout (note there is a test specifically for this case)?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
