On Tue, 7 May 2013 09:43:30 -0500
Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > On Mon, 6 May 2013 19:08:08 -0500
> > Serge Hallyn wrote:
> >
> > > Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > > > On Mon, 6 May 2013 15:31:14 -0500
> > > > Serge Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 19:08:08 -0500
> Serge Hallyn wrote:
>
> > Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > > On Mon, 6 May 2013 15:31:14 -0500
> > > Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > >
> > > > Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > > >
On Mon, 6 May 2013 19:08:08 -0500
Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > On Mon, 6 May 2013 15:31:14 -0500
> > Serge Hallyn wrote:
> >
> > > Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > > > On Mon, 6 May 2013 13:06:43 -0400
> > > > Dwight Engen wrote:
Hi Dwight,
Thank you so much for quick triage and a patch! I briefly tested it and
looks like it fixed the issue here as well. IMHO the thread safety of LXC
is not that bad with the staging tree (thanks to your lxc-monitord and
couple of other concurrency fixes). I believe we can
create/start/stop
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 15:31:14 -0500
> Serge Hallyn wrote:
>
> > Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > > On Mon, 6 May 2013 13:06:43 -0400
> > > Dwight Engen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Çağlar,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the test program
On Mon, 6 May 2013 15:31:14 -0500
Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > On Mon, 6 May 2013 13:06:43 -0400
> > Dwight Engen wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Çağlar,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the test program, I can sort of recreate it here with
> > > that, although once I lx
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 13:06:43 -0400
> Dwight Engen wrote:
>
> > Hi Çağlar,
> >
> > Thanks for the test program, I can sort of recreate it here with that,
> > although once I lxc-stop them all, lxc-monitord does go away. I put a
> > debug in lxc_wai
On Mon, 6 May 2013 13:06:43 -0400
Dwight Engen wrote:
> Hi Çağlar,
>
> Thanks for the test program, I can sort of recreate it here with that,
> although once I lxc-stop them all, lxc-monitord does go away. I put a
> debug in lxc_wait() to see that the client always close the fd to the
> monitord
Hi Çağlar,
Thanks for the test program, I can sort of recreate it here with that,
although once I lxc-stop them all, lxc-monitord does go away. I put a
debug in lxc_wait() to see that the client always close the fd to the
monitord and they all were closed so I'm not sure why lxc-monitord isn't
see
OK reproduced it with C API
26624lxc-monitord 1367687488.006 NOTICE lxc_monitord - monitoring
lxcpath /var/lib/lxc
26627lxc-monitord 1367687488.008 INFO lxc_monitord - monitor fifo
/var/lib/lxc/monitor-fifo exists, already running?
26630lxc-monitord 1367687488.009 INFO lxc_mo
Hi Dwight,
I run same commands and this time it ended up with 6 clients (output ->
http://10ur.org/monitor.txt). I'll try to reproduce this with c/python.;.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 11:15 AM, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> Hi Dwight,
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Dwight Engen wrote:
>
>> Hi Çağlar
Hi Dwight,
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Dwight Engen wrote:
> Hi Çağlar,
>
> I'm confused by your output, it certainly looks like something isn't
> right. Do you have a theory as to why monitord thinks it still has 9
> clients?
Nope, I don't. I'll try to debug more and also try to reproduce
Hi Çağlar,
I'm confused by your output, it certainly looks like something isn't
right. Do you have a theory as to why monitord thinks it still has 9
clients?
On Sat, 4 May 2013 00:01:45 -0400
S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think I understand why I'm confused before while chasing another
Hi all,
I think I understand why I'm confused before while chasing another bug.
This is what I'm seeing right now.
* I patched lxc_monitord.c with following
diff --git a/src/lxc/lxc_monitord.c b/src/lxc/lxc_monitord.c
index e76af71..59f1e9d 100644
--- a/src/lxc/lxc_monitord.c
+++ b/src/lxc/lxc_
Yeah, I think you all correct and I'm just confused - probably direct
effect of lack of caffeine. And no, it's not complicating something for me,
it's working great. I just want to make sure that I'm wrong :)
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Dwight Engen wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:07:22 +02
On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:07:22 +0200
Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On 04/26/2013 09:42 PM, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> > Hey Dwight,
> >
> > I'm observing following behavior with staging tree and just wanted
> > to make sure that what I'm seeing is the expected;
> >
> > * Initially nothing runs
> >
> > [c
Quoting S.Çağlar Onur (cag...@10ur.org):
> Hey Dwight,
>
> I'm observing following behavior with staging tree and just wanted to make
> sure that what I'm seeing is the expected;
>
> * Initially nothing runs
>
> [caglar@qgq:~/Projects/lxc/examples] sudo ./list
> bankai (STOPPED)
> bleach (STOPPE
On 04/26/2013 09:42 PM, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> Hey Dwight,
>
> I'm observing following behavior with staging tree and just wanted to
> make sure that what I'm seeing is the expected;
>
> * Initially nothing runs
>
> [caglar@qgq:~/Projects/lxc/examples] sudo ./list
> bankai (STOPPED)
> bleach (ST
Hey Dwight,
I'm observing following behavior with staging tree and just wanted to make
sure that what I'm seeing is the expected;
* Initially nothing runs
[caglar@qgq:~/Projects/lxc/examples] sudo ./list
bankai (STOPPED)
bleach (STOPPED)
zangetsu (STOPPED)
* I start one container using the API
19 matches
Mail list logo
