I agree with all the explanations given here.
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Manas Kelshikar wrote:
> Yes. It is a bug and should be done before line 119:
> self._do_task_action(db_task). It can definitely lead to bugs especially
> since _do_task_action itself updates the status.
>
> On
>
> In case of async tasks, executor keeps the task status at RUNNING, and a
> 3rd party system will call convey_task_resutls on engine.
Yes, it is correct. With this approach (in case sync task), we set task
state to SUCCESS if it returns a result, or ERROR if we can't see a result
and exceptio
Yes. It is a bug and should be done before line 119: self._do_task_action(
db_task). It can definitely lead to bugs especially since _do_task_action
itself updates the status.
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 8:46 PM, W Chan wrote:
> In addition, for sync tasks, it'll overwrite the task state from SU
In addition, for sync tasks, it'll overwrite the task state from SUCCESS to
RUNNING.
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Dmitri Zimine wrote:
> My understanding is: it's the engine which finalizes the task results,
> based on the status returned by the task via convey_task_result call.
>
>
> https
My understanding is: it's the engine which finalizes the task results, based on
the status returned by the task via convey_task_result call.
https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/engine/abstract_engine.py#L82-L84
https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/engin
Regarding
https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/engine/scalable/executor/server.py#L123,
should the status be set to SUCCESS instead of RUNNING? If not, can
someone clarify why the task should remain RUNNING?
Thanks.
Winson
___
OpenS
