Project

General

Profile

Actions

action #55553

closed

Not so helpful messages in logs about "Stopping worker 28181 gracefully (800 seconds)", "Worker XXX started"

Added by okurz over 4 years ago. Updated over 4 years ago.

Status:
Rejected
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Feature requests
Target version:
-
Start date:
2019-08-15
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:

Description

This seems to have recently changed. The notion of "worker" is not very clear. Is this about minion workers? The message is probably happening a bit too often for "info" level and also missing details what the consequence or context is.

Actions #1

Updated by okurz over 4 years ago

  • Assignee changed from okurz to kraih

This message is coming from Mojolicious in file Mojo/server/Prefork

This was changed in a commit of Mojolicious in particular:

commit c85b18916
Author: Sebastian Riedel <sri@cpan.org>
Date:   Tue Jul 4 12:08:23 2017 +0200

    server log messages are not just for debugging

@kraih do you have a suggestion regarding this? Should we change it upstream again, handle it differently downstream?

Actions #2

Updated by kraih over 4 years ago

July 2017 is not "recently". :) I don't see anything wrong with those log messages. Worker is general web server terminology, this is the Mojolicious prefork server.

Actions #3

Updated by okurz over 4 years ago

yes, but we are talking within the openQA context. To me it seems this changed "recently" which can happen when we just updated the perl-Mojolicious package on the mentioned instance recently. Also in the context of openQA there is a "worker" which is not the same as the web server worker hence my questions for suggestions.

Actions #4

Updated by kraih over 4 years ago

This is a complete non-issue imo., there are already more components used by openQA that are called a "worker", Apache workers, Minion workers, Mojo prefork workers, and probably more i can't think of atm. (Postgres has workers we might use in the future)... And the only component we are in a position to actually rename would be our own openQA workers.

Actions #5

Updated by okurz over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Rejected

fine, let's leave it then

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF