[Swift-devel] Coaster Task Submission Stalling
Mihael Hategan
hategan at mcs.anl.gov
Thu Sep 11 12:54:46 CDT 2014
I thought we switched to git.
Mihael
On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 12:41 -0500, Tim Armstrong wrote:
> I thought I was running the latest trunk, I'll rebuild and see if I can
> reproduce the issue.
>
> - Tim
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Mihael Hategan <hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> wrote:
>
> > The method "getMetaChannel()" has been removed. Where did you get the
> > code from?
> >
> > Mihael
> >
> > On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 12:16 -0500, Tim Armstrong wrote:
> > > I'm seeing failures when running Swift/T tests with
> > > start-coaster-service.sh.
> > >
> > > E.g. the turbine test coaster-exec-1. I can provide instructions for
> > > running the test if needed (roughly, you need to build Swift/T with
> > coaster
> > > support enabled, then make tests/coaster-exec-1.result in the turbine
> > > directory). The github swift-t release is up to date if you want to use
> > > that.
> > >
> > > Full log is attached, stack trace excerpt is below.
> > >
> > > - Tim
> > >
> > > 2014-09-11 12:11:13,708-0500 INFO BlockQueueProcessor Starting...
> > > id=0911-1112130
> > > Using threaded sender for TCPChannel [type: server, contact:
> > 127.0.0.1:48242
> > > ]
> > > 2014-09-11 12:11:13,708-0500 INFO AbstractStreamCoasterChannel Using
> > > threaded sender for TCPChannel [type: server, contact: 127.0.0.1:48242]
> > > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelException: Invalid channel: null
> > > @id://null-nullS
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.getMetaChannel(ChannelManager.java:452)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.reserveChannel(ChannelManager.java:226)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.job.manager.PassiveQueueProcessor.setClientChannelContext(PassiveQueueProcessor.java:41)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.job.manager.JobQueue.setClientChannelContext(JobQueue.java:135)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.SubmitJobHandler.requestComplete(SubmitJobHandler.java:77)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.handlers.RequestHandler.receiveCompleted(RequestHandler.java:88)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractCoasterChannel.handleRequest(AbstractCoasterChannel.java:527)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.step(AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.java:173)
> > > at
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.Multiplexer.run(Multiplexer.java:70)
> > > provider=local
> > > 2014-09-11 12:11:13,930-0500 INFO ExecutionTaskHandler provider=local
> > > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelException: Invalid channel: null
> > > @id://null-nullS
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.getMetaChannel(ChannelManager.java:452)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.getMetaChannel(ChannelManager.java:432)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.reserveLongTerm(ChannelManager.java:472)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.SubmitJobHandler.requestComplete(SubmitJobHandler.java:80)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.handlers.RequestHandler.receiveCompleted(RequestHandler.java:88)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractCoasterChannel.handleRequest(AbstractCoasterChannel.java:527)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.step(AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.java:173)
> > > at
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.Multiplexer.run(Multiplexer.java:70)
> > > Handler(tag: 38907, SUBMITJOB) sending error: Could not deserialize job
> > > description
> > > org.globus.cog.coaster.ProtocolException: Could not deserialize job
> > > description
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.SubmitJobHandler.requestComplete(SubmitJobHandler.java:84)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.handlers.RequestHandler.receiveCompleted(RequestHandler.java:88)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractCoasterChannel.handleRequest(AbstractCoasterChannel.java:527)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.step(AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.java:173)
> > > at
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.Multiplexer.run(Multiplexer.java:70)
> > > Caused by: org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelException: Invalid
> > > channel: null at id://null-nullS
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.getMetaChannel(ChannelManager.java:452)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.getMetaChannel(ChannelManager.java:432)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.reserveLongTerm(ChannelManager.java:472)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.SubmitJobHandler.requestComplete(SubmitJobHandler.java:80)
> > > ... 4 more
> > > 2014-09-11 12:11:13,937-0500 INFO RequestReply Handler(tag: 38907,
> > > SUBMITJOB) sending error: Could not deserialize job description
> > > org.globus.cog.coaster.ProtocolException: Could not deserialize job
> > > description
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.SubmitJobHandler.requestComplete(SubmitJobHandler.java:84)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.handlers.RequestHandler.receiveCompleted(RequestHandler.java:88)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractCoasterChannel.handleRequest(AbstractCoasterChannel.java:527)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.step(AbstractStreamCoasterChannel.java:173)
> > > at
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.Multiplexer.run(Multiplexer.java:70)
> > > Caused by: org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelException: Invalid
> > > channel: null at id://null-nullS
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.getMetaChannel(ChannelManager.java:452)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.getMetaChannel(ChannelManager.java:432)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.coaster.channels.ChannelManager.reserveLongTerm(ChannelManager.java:472)
> > > at
> > >
> > org.globus.cog.abstraction.coaster.service.SubmitJobHandler.requestComplete(SubmitJobHandler.java:80)
> > > ... 4 more
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Tim Armstrong <
> > tim.g.armstrong at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This all sounds great.
> > > >
> > > > Just to check that I've understood correctly, from the client's point
> > of
> > > > view:
> > > > * The per-client settings behave the same if -shared is not provided.
> > > > * Per-client settings are ignored if -shared is provided
> > > >
> > > > I had one question:
> > > > * Do automatically allocated workers work with per-client settings? I
> > > > understand there were some issues related to sharing workers between
> > > > clients. Was the solution to have separate worker pools, or is this
> > just
> > > > not supported?
> > > >
> > > > - Tim
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Mihael Hategan <hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> So...
> > > >>
> > > >> There were bugs. Lots of bugs.
> > > >> I did some work over the weekend to fix some of these and clean up the
> > > >> coaster code. Here's a summary:
> > > >>
> > > >> - there was some stuff in the low level coaster code to deal with
> > > >> persisting coaster channels over multiple connections with various
> > > >> options, like periodic connections, client or server initiated
> > > >> connections, buffering of commands, etc. None of this was used by
> > Swift,
> > > >> and the code was pretty messy. I removed that.
> > > >> - there were some issues with multiple clients:
> > > >> * improper shutdown of relevant workers when a client disconnected
> > > >> * the worker task dispatcher was a singleton and had a reference to
> > > >> one block allocator, whereas multiple clients involved multiple
> > > >> allocators.
> > > >> - there were a bunch of locking issues in the C client that valgrind
> > > >> caught
> > > >> - the idea of remote job ids was a bit hard to work with. This remote
> > id
> > > >> was the job id that the service assigned to a job. This is necessary
> > > >> because two different clients can submit jobs with the same id. The
> > > >> remote id would be communicated to the client as the reply to the
> > submit
> > > >> request. However, it was entirely possible for a notification about
> > job
> > > >> status to be sent to the client before the submit reply was. Since
> > > >> notifications were sent using the remote-id, the client would have no
> > > >> idea what job the notifications belonged to. Now, the server might
> > need
> > > >> a unique job id, but there is no reason why it cannot use the client
> > id
> > > >> when communicating the status to a client. So that's there now.
> > > >> - the way the C client was working, its jobs ended up not going to the
> > > >> workers, but the local queue. The service settings now allow
> > specifying
> > > >> the provider/jobManager/url to be used to start blocks, and jobs are
> > > >> routed appropriately if they do not have the batch job flag set.
> > > >>
> > > >> I also added a shared service mode. We discussed this before.
> > Basically
> > > >> you start the coaster service with "-shared <service.properties>" and
> > > >> all the settings are read from that file. In this case, all clients
> > > >> share the same worker pool, and client settings are ignored.
> > > >>
> > > >> The C client now has a multi-job testing tool which can submit many
> > jobs
> > > >> with the desired level of concurrency.
> > > >>
> > > >> I have tested the C client with both shared and non-shared mode, with
> > > >> various levels of jobs being sent, with either one or two concurrent
> > > >> clients.
> > > >>
> > > >> I haven't tested manual workers.
> > > >>
> > > >> I've also decided that during normal operation (i.e. client connects,
> > > >> submits jobs, shuts down gracefully), there should be no exceptions in
> > > >> the coaster log. I think we should stick to that principle. This was
> > the
> > > >> case last I tested, and we should consider any deviation from that to
> > be
> > > >> a problem. Of course, there are some things for which there is no
> > > >> graceful shut down, such as ctrl+C-ing a manual worker. Exceptions are
> > > >> fine in that case.
> > > >>
> > > >> So anyway, let's start from here.
> > > >>
> > > >> Mihael
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 13:09 -0500, Tim Armstrong wrote:
> > > >> > Thanks, let me know if there's anything I can help do.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > - Tim
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Mihael Hategan <
> > hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Thanks. It also seems that there is an older bug in there in
> > which the
> > > >> > > client connection is not properly accounted for and things start
> > > >> failing
> > > >> > > two minutes after the client connects (which is also probably why
> > you
> > > >> > > didn't see this in runs with many short client connections). I'm
> > not
> > > >> > > sure why the fix for that bug isn't in the trunk code.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > In any event, I'll set up a client submission loop and fix all
> > these
> > > >> > > things.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Mihael
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 12:13 -0500, Tim Armstrong wrote:
> > > >> > > > Ok, here it is with the additional debug messages. Source code
> > > >> change is
> > > >> > > > in commit 890c41f2ba701b10264553471590096d6f94c278.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Warning: the tarball will expand to several gigabytes of logs.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I had to do multiple client runs to trigger it. It seems like
> > the
> > > >> > > problem
> > > >> > > > might be triggered by abnormal termination of the client.
> > First 18
> > > >> runs
> > > >> > > > went fine, problem only started when I ctrl-c-ed the swift/t
> > run #19
> > > >> > > before
> > > >> > > > the run #20 that exhibited delays.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~tga/files/worker-logs3.tar.gz
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > - Tim
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Tim Armstrong <
> > > >> tim.g.armstrong at gmail.com
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > It's here:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~tga/files/coaster-service.out.full.gz
> > .
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I'll add some extra debug messages in the coaster C++ client
> > and
> > > >> see
> > > >> > > if I
> > > >> > > > > can recreate the scenario.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > - Tim
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Mihael Hategan <
> > > >> hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> Ok, so that's legit.
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> It does look like shut down workers are not properly
> > accounted
> > > >> for in
> > > >> > > > >> some places (and I believe Yadu submitted a bug for this).
> > > >> However, I
> > > >> > > do
> > > >> > > > >> not see the dead time you mention in either of the last two
> > sets
> > > >> of
> > > >> > > > >> logs. It looks like each client instance submits a continous
> > > >> stream of
> > > >> > > > >> jobs.
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> So let's get back to the initial log. Can I have the full
> > > >> service log?
> > > >> > > > >> I'm trying to track what happened with the jobs submitted
> > before
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > >> first big pause.
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> Also, a log message in CoasterClient::updateJobStatus() (or
> > > >> friends)
> > > >> > > > >> would probably help a lot here.
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> Mihael
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 15:34 -0500, Tim Armstrong wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> > Should be here:
> > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~tga/worker-logs2.tar.gz
> > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Mihael Hategan <
> > > >> hategan at mcs.anl.gov
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > > The first worker "failing" is 0904-20022331. The log
> > looks
> > > >> funny
> > > >> > > at
> > > >> > > > >> the
> > > >> > > > >> > > end.
> > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > Can you git pull and re-run? The worker is getting some
> > > >> command
> > > >> > > at the
> > > >> > > > >> > > end there and doing nothing about it and I wonder why.
> > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > Mihael
> > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 14:35 -0500, Tim Armstrong wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> > > > Ok, now I have some worker logs:
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~tga/2014-9-4-worker-logs.tar.gz
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > There's nothing obvious I see in the worker logs that
> > would
> > > >> > > > >> indicate why
> > > >> > > > >> > > > the connection was broken.
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > - Tim
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Tim Armstrong <
> > > >> > > > >> tim.g.armstrong at gmail.com
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > This is all running locally on my laptop, so I think
> > we
> > > >> can
> > > >> > > rule
> > > >> > > > >> out
> > > >> > > > >> > > 1).
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > It also seems like it's a state the coaster service
> > gets
> > > >> into
> > > >> > > > >> after a
> > > >> > > > >> > > few
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > client sessions: generally the first coaster run
> > works
> > > >> fine,
> > > >> > > then
> > > >> > > > >> > > after a
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > few runs the problem occurs more frequently.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > I'm going to try and get worker logs, in the meantime
> > > >> i've got
> > > >> > > > >> some
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > jstacks (attached).
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > Matching service logs (largish) are here if needed:
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~tga/service.out.gz
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Mihael Hategan <
> > > >> > > > >> hategan at mcs.anl.gov>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Ah, makes sense.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> 2 minutes is the channel timeout. Each live
> > connection
> > > >> is
> > > >> > > > >> guaranteed
> > > >> > > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> have some communication for any 2 minute time
> > window,
> > > >> > > partially
> > > >> > > > >> due to
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> periodic heartbeats (sent every 1 minute). If no
> > > >> packets flow
> > > >> > > > >> for the
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> duration of 2 minutes, the connection is assumed
> > broken
> > > >> and
> > > >> > > all
> > > >> > > > >> jobs
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> that were submitted to the respective workers are
> > > >> considered
> > > >> > > > >> failed.
> > > >> > > > >> > > So
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> there seems to be an issue with the connections to
> > some
> > > >> of
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > >> > > workers,
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> and it takes 2 minutes to detect them.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Since the service seems to be alive (although a
> > jstack
> > > >> on the
> > > >> > > > >> service
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> when thing seem to hang might help), this leaves two
> > > >> > > > >> possibilities:
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> 1 - some genuine network problem
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> 2 - the worker died without properly closing TCP
> > > >> connections
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> If (2), you could enable worker logging
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> (Settings::Key::WORKER_LOGGING_LEVEL = "DEBUG") to
> > see
> > > >> if
> > > >> > > > >> anything
> > > >> > > > >> > > shows
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> up.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Mihael
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 20:26 -0500, Tim Armstrong
> > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Here are client and service logs, with part of
> > > >> service log
> > > >> > > > >> edited
> > > >> > > > >> > > down
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> to
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > be a reasonable size (I have the full thing if
> > > >> needed, but
> > > >> > > it
> > > >> > > > >> was
> > > >> > > > >> > > over a
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > gigabyte).
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > One relevant section is from 19:49:35 onwards.
> > The
> > > >> client
> > > >> > > > >> submits 4
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> jobs
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > (its limit), but they don't complete until
> > 19:51:32
> > > >> or so
> > > >> > > (I
> > > >> > > > >> can see
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> that
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > one task completed based on ncompleted=1 in the
> > > >> > > check_tasks log
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> message).
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > It looks like something has happened with broken
> > > >> pipes and
> > > >> > > > >> workers
> > > >> > > > >> > > being
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > lost, but I'm not sure what the ultimate cause of
> > > >> that is
> > > >> > > > >> likely to
> > > >> > > > >> > > be.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > - Tim
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Mihael Hategan <
> > > >> > > > >> hategan at mcs.anl.gov
> > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Hi Tim,
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > I've never seen this before with pure Java.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Do you have logs from these runs?
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Mihael
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 16:49 -0500, Tim Armstrong
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I'm running a test Swift/T script that submit
> > > >> tasks to
> > > >> > > > >> Coasters
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> through
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > C++ client and I'm seeing some odd behaviour
> > > >> where task
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > submission/execution is stalling for ~2 minute
> > > >> periods.
> > > >> > > > >> For
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> example, I'm
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > seeing submit log messages like "submitting
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > urn:133-1409778135377-1409778135378:
> > > >> /bin/hostname" in
> > > >> > > > >> bursts of
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> several
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > seconds with a gap of roughly 2 minutes in
> > > >> between,
> > > >> > > e.g.
> > > >> > > > >> I'm
> > > >> > > > >> > > seeing
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > bursts
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > with the following intervals in my logs.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 16:07:04,603 to 16:07:10,391
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 16:09:07,377 to 16:09:13,076
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 16:11:10,005 to 16:11:16,770
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 16:13:13,291 to 16:13:19,296
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 16:15:16,000 to 16:15:21,602
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > From what I can tell, the delay is on the
> > coaster
> > > >> > > service
> > > >> > > > >> side:
> > > >> > > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> C
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > client is just waiting for a response.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > The jobs are just being submitted through the
> > > >> local job
> > > >> > > > >> > > manager, so
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> I
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > wouldn't expect any delays there. The tasks
> > are
> > > >> also
> > > >> > > just
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > "/bin/hostname",
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > so should return immediately.
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I'm going to continue digging into this on my
> > > >> own, but
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > >> 2
> > > >> > > > >> > > minute
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> delay
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > seems like a big clue: does anyone have an
> > idea
> > > >> what
> > > >> > > could
> > > >> > > > >> cause
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> stalls
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > in
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > task submission of 2 minute duration?
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Cheers,
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Tim
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
More information about the Swift-devel
mailing list