J - isn't the problem that self.time_until_next_check can be negative in
is_check_required() if the machine has been off for a few days and then
gets turned back on. The correct solution would seem to be to set the
self.time_until_next_check = self.refresh_period once you know a check
is needed.
def is_check_required(self):
:
if self.time_until_next_check <= 0:
self.time_until_next_check = self.refresh_period
return True
else:
return False
The call in:
def do_next_check(self):
:
if self.time_until_next_check > DAILY_SECS:
next_check_time = DAILY_SECS
Is ok if the refresh period is > a day and you have the period set to
weekly and the machine is up for more than a day then this ensures the
is_check_required() gets fired everyday the machine is up.
JR
This should be fine as [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Negative time doesn't make sense. If next_check_time is <= 0, isn't it
> time to check right now?
>
> If the time_until_next_check is < refresh_period, I think we should
> simply perform the check and then set next_check to now +
> refresh_period. I think that would make this a little easier to follow.
>
> -j
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 06:01:14PM -0800, Brock Pytlik wrote:
>
>> Ok, then since we've observed time can be negative, that's the right
>> delay in this situation? Would replacing 0 with 10 make everyone happy?
>>
>> Brock
>>
>> jmr wrote:
>>
>>> Brock if we ever hit next_check_time < 0 and set next_check_time = 0:
>>>
>>> 333 + if next_check_time < 0:
>>> 334 + next_check_time = 0
>>>
>>> Then you will go into a spin in the call to:
>>> 337 + gobject.timeout_add(0, self.do_next_check)
>>>
>>> This is what was happening in the bug we tracked down last week.
>>>
>>> JR
>>>
>>> Brock Pytlik wrote:
>>>
>>>> Webrev:
>>>> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~bpytlik/ips-5171-v1/
>>>>
>>>> Bug:
>>>> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=5171
>>>> Updatemanager eating 50% of the CPU
>>>>
>>>> This changes so that the next check to check for updates isn't
>>>> scheduled until after the current check for updates happens.
>>>>
>>>> Brock
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
