Subject: bug#67485: closed (Re: bug#67485: [Cuirass] Workers not waking up after server went away)

From: [email-masked] (GNU bug Tracking System)
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 09:40:02 +0000

Your bug report

#67485: [Cuirass] Workers not waking up after server went away

which was filed against the guix package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to [email-masked].

-- 
67485: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=67485
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact [email-masked] with problems

Subject: Re: bug#67485: [Cuirass] Workers not waking up after server went away
From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:38:22 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> skribis:

> The ‘cuirass remote-worker’ processes (1.2.0-1.bdc1f9f) didn’t wake up
> after ‘cuirass remote-server’ stopped responding earlier today,
> remaining stuck while waiting for a reply to their latest “request work”
> message:

I believe this is fixed.  In particular, Cuirass commit
fdb6bdfa27d9da8d052ed76b6a05b3817ff19777 added a timeout waiting for
“request work” replies.

Ludo’.

Subject: [Cuirass] Workers not waking up after server went away
From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 14:28:41 +0100
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

Hello,

The ‘cuirass remote-worker’ processes (1.2.0-1.bdc1f9f) didn’t wake up
after ‘cuirass remote-server’ stopped responding earlier today,
remaining stuck while waiting for a reply to their latest “request work”
message:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Nov 27 02:47:30 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: derivation `/gnu/store/acljcvz7wb3pc9bxipkl1vf74ac7ns2z-calf-0.90.3.drv' build failed: build o
Nov 27 02:47:30 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: request work.
Nov 27 02:47:30 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: derivation `/gnu/store/z51fxy3j476136wcqd5gmy9v9r2vyqwn-csdr-0.18.2.drv' build failed: build o
Nov 27 02:47:30 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: request work.
Nov 27 02:47:44 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:47:44 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:48:44 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:48:44 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:49:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:49:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:50:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:50:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:51:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:51:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:52:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:52:45 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:53:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:53:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:54:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:54:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:55:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:55:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:55:53 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: worker's alive
Nov 27 02:56:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:56:46 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: HKCtyhxH: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
Nov 27 02:57:47 guixp9 cuirass[22122]: COhE8Mw6: ping tcp://10.0.0.1:5555.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

They had to be manually restarted.

This shouldn’t be the case.  Instead, they should say “received
bootstrap message” when the new ‘cuirass remote-server’ is spawned and
keep going.

Ludo’.