Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

cowboy_acceptors will not get updated with OTP relups #81

Closed
ferd opened this issue Oct 28, 2011 · 3 comments
Closed

cowboy_acceptors will not get updated with OTP relups #81

ferd opened this issue Oct 28, 2011 · 3 comments
Milestone

Comments

@ferd
Copy link
Contributor

ferd commented Oct 28, 2011

An improvement on the previous behaviour was introduced in: d9da533

The problem is that right now, the module tuple for the supervisor is []. When the OTP release handler will try to upgrade code, it will navigate through the OTP supervision tree and ask all of the supervisors to tell them what kind of code their children are running. By leaving it to an empty list, the module will be ignored and not upgraded.

To fix this, the module name must be added to the empty list ([cowboy_acceptor]). However, the acceptors are accepting (a blocking operation) and will be killed after a while if they do not reply to release_handler's requests.

The behaviour of the acceptors should be changed to accept only for a few (milli)seconds at a time, look for new messages (including upgrade ones, coming from the sys module), react to them, and then start accepting over again.

@essen
Copy link
Member

essen commented Feb 27, 2012

I'm not sure this is an issue anymore. We have them upgrading through listener upgrades now. There's no real state to upgrade, just the code itself.

@ferd
Copy link
Contributor Author

ferd commented Feb 27, 2012

If that is the case, then it shouldn't be a problem anymore.

@ferd ferd closed this as completed Feb 27, 2012
@essen
Copy link
Member

essen commented Feb 27, 2012

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants