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

unexpected response from server [500]: Too many open files #130

Open
pdreiter opened this issue Jun 26, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

unexpected response from server [500]: Too many open files #130

pdreiter opened this issue Jun 26, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@pdreiter
Copy link
Collaborator

On a single program that I'm running algorithm type genetic, I'm seeing the following exception occur a few times:

<title>requests.exceptions.ConnectionError: ('Connection aborted.', OSError(24, 'Too many open files')) // Werkzeug Debugger</title>

I captured the STDOUT to a debug.log, so if this is something that is of interest to debug, I can attach that log.

errata: I have a large population size and number of generations that probably contributes to the expression of this error:

algorithm:
  type: genetic
  population: 200
  generations: 200
  tournament-size: 20
  mutation-rate: 0.8
  crossover-rate: 0.4
  # look at entire test suite for test sampling [subset of testsuite is 100%]
  test-sample-size: null

Looks like this ConnectionError ultimately results in the darjeeling process to hang. I'm guessing that it's waiting for evaluation data from the lost Candidates.


submitted from GitQ

@pdreiter
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Attached is the STDOUT from the darjeeling run [large file, gzip'd]
anonymized.debug.log.gz

@pdreiter
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Follow-up : reducing the population size to 50 from 200 did not prevent the ConnectionError from occurring, but did prolong the time before the Error occurred.

@ChrisTimperley
Copy link
Collaborator

This sounds like a resource leak related to the requests API calls that are used to talk to the BugZoo server. From reading a few similar issue reports for requests, it sounds like it may be necessary to explicitly close requests.

I'll put together a potential fix now.

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