Remove GC timeout, fix GC tests - #3494
Conversation
|
Oh my, it timed out on me right away again. Is there any way to avoid the sleep? sync(1)? |
|
Sync won't matter as it does kernel cache to disk and problem here is go-ipfs process to kernel. I would just suggest bigger files and error margins. |
|
Yeah... i remember this test being really troublesome. Let me know if you need any help @lgierth |
|
If we're trying to wait for IPFS flusing its writes, why not expose the state of that in the |
|
I don't think it will be easy. |
|
@lgierth ipfs flushes its writes... what is the problem? |
|
The delay it will take to flush the write is unspecified AFAIK. |
|
The commands shouldnt return before things get flushed... (unless you have no-flush set) |
This timeout was: - unneccessary - based on a metric that doesn't make sense License: MIT Signed-off-by: Lars Gierth <larsg@systemli.org>
GetStorageUsage() is super expensive as it involves a full repo scan, and it's already bad enough that we have do it once. The call that's being removed here is purely for cosmetical purposes: printing the number of bytes freed by the GC run. Let's drop it. License: MIT Signed-off-by: Lars Gierth <larsg@systemli.org>
|
@lgierth progress here? |
49802eb to
2836c64
Compare
|
This is good to go, I've split the stuff about tests out into the feat/corerepo-gc branch, since it turned into a full-blown rewrite of this GC stuff. :) This one here now only removes the timeout context around gc.GC(), and the second repo scan after the GC run. |
|
OSX failure is #3496 |
whyrusleeping
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This LGTM, now we can at least run gc...
Closes #3436 #2129
commit a9b8c8b
Author: Lars Gierth larsg@systemli.org
Date: Fri Dec 9 17:26:53 2016 +0100
commit 8f0c7ee
Author: Lars Gierth larsg@systemli.org
Date: Fri Dec 9 17:28:31 2016 +0100
commit 49802eb
Author: Lars Gierth larsg@systemli.org
Date: Fri Dec 9 18:04:55 2016 +0100