On 06.03.2014 14:55, john alexander sanabria ordonez wrote:
well, what could I say... your answer do not solve the problem.
All I can say is that I've seen working Java code which deletes VMs,
based on this sample. The language should play no role (unless there is
a bug), it's all the same API behind it, whether it's used by C++ (e.g.
VBoxManage) or anything else.
Let's approach it from a different angle - can you provide VBoxSVC.log
(location is platform dependent, usually in the .VirtualBox subdirectory
of the home directory) for a case where you just produced the hang? If
you make sure that no VirtualBox related activities (no GUI, ...) are
running before your test it'd avoid unrelated log messages.
Klaus
On 6 March 2014 05:35, Klaus Espenlaub <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
John,
please stay on the mailing list. This is a public service, if you
want personal support I have to ask for your Oracle customer
support identifier...
On 05.03.2014 20:16, john alexander sanabria ordonez wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I read the documentation but (from my experience) it does not
behave as I was expecting. For instance, I do understand that the
deleteConfig method does not reach the 100 percent if there is an
error but why the library does not throw an exception informing
about it. In addition, why if the previous method (delete) works
with no errors this time "deleteConfig" will generate any error?
The asynchronous part of the deletion might fail (and that's
exactly the same as in older versions, just the method name has
been changed), and your code will simply hang as it doesn't
properly check for completion. Failed async operations usually
will never reach 100% - why should they, they failed before.
These failures will NOT cause exceptions from the progress object
method calls, you have to check for them explicitly. It's been
always like that, and there's lots of sample code out there which
shows how to do this properly.
About the wait, this is the actual code
out << "To delete "
mediums.each {
out << it.name <http://it.name> + " "
}
def iprogress = machine.delete(mediums)
out << "\nDeleting "
while (iprogress.percent != 100) {
Do not check for 100%, check if iprogress.getCompletion returns
non-zero (dunno if the true/false stuff makes it all the way to
Groovy).
out << "."
out.flush()
Thread.sleep(500)
Again, you're ignoring that you should wait using the method from
the progress object, iprogress.waitForCompletion(500) as this
gives the API middleware the opportunity to run its event queues
and so on.
PLEASE have a look at the Java sample (TestVBox.java), it contains
many useful code sequences which are verified to be sensible (not
that all of them go into extreme error checking, but at least do
the bare minimum necessary to avoid hangs).
Klaus
}
John,
On 4 March 2014 13:55, Klaus Espenlaub
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Hi,
On 04.03.2014 14:44, john alexander sanabria ordonez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wrote a Groovy script to use the Java binding to manage
virtual
> machines through the VirtualBox web service interface. My
script worked
> well in VirtualBox 4.2.x but when I updated to version 4.3
I noted that
> my unregistervm procedure does not work. First, the
IMachine.delete
> method was not available and it was changed by
IMachine.deleteConfig
> which basically works similarly to the delete method. I
made the
> corresponding modifications however it does not delete the
mediums
> returned by the IMachine.unregister method.
This is documented in the SDK reference, for the API changes
in 4.3.
>
> My unregistervm methods looks similar to this
>
> def mediums =
machine.unregister(CleanupMode.DetachAllReturnHardDisksOnly)
> def iprogress = machine.deleteConfig(mediums)
> while (iprogress.percent < 100) {
> out << "."
> }
>
> and it never ends because the iprogress.percent never
reaches 100.
>
> What I am doing wrong? Thanks for your help.
The percentage will never reach 100 if there is any error.
You should be
adding more flexible progress checking (there should be
enough working
samples out there, including the Java sample code). What you
have is
asking for hangs. Also, you should at least have some wait for
completion (if you prefer with very low timeout), as
otherwise you're
simply burning CPU cycles.
Klaus
>
> John,
>
_______________________________________________
vbox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.virtualbox.org/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
