Consider making UNREGISTER_TIMEOUT configurable #320
Comments
|
Hi @jorgenfb, sounds good! Could you provide a PR? |
jorgenfb
added a commit
to jorgenfb/rosbridge_suite
that referenced
this issue
Feb 8, 2018
Pull request RobotWebTools#247 introduces a 10 second delay to mitigate issue RobotWebTools#138. This change makes this delay configurable by passing an argument either on the command line or when including a launch file. Usage example: ```xml <launch> <include file="$(find rosbridge_server)/launch/rosbridge_websocket.launch"> <arg name="unregister_timeout" value="5.0"/> </include> </launch> ``` Closes RobotWebTools#320
jihoonl
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 24, 2018
Pull request #247 introduces a 10 second delay to mitigate issue #138. This change makes this delay configurable by passing an argument either on the command line or when including a launch file. Usage example: ```xml <launch> <include file="$(find rosbridge_server)/launch/rosbridge_websocket.launch"> <arg name="unregister_timeout" value="5.0"/> </include> </launch> ``` Closes #320
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Pull request #247 introduces a 10 second delay to mitigate issue #138. I propose making this property configurable through parameters. I can provide a PR if we decide it is a good idea.
The reason I want to configure the timeout is that we still see the problem described in #138 at rare occasions and would experiment with other timeouts. I also see forks completely disabling the unregistering from a topic to prevent these problems. Even if you don't agree with their solution, making the timeout configurable would probably allow them to run the official version with a really high timeout value, removing the need to maintain a fork.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: