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

[JENKINS-40491] - Improve diagnostincs of the preliminary FifoBuffer termination #138

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 16, 2016

Conversation

oleg-nenashev
Copy link
Member

When NioChannelHub suffers from the preliminary buffer closure, it will print a SEVERE log to the Agent log. This change should improve diagnostics of issues like JENKINS-31050, which has been likely somehow addressed/fixed in #100.

https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-40491

@reviewbybees

…termination.

When NioChannelHub suffers from the preliminary buffer closure, it will print a SEVERE log to the Agent log.
This change should improve diagnostics of issues like JENKINS-31050
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 16, 2016

This pull request originates from a CloudBees employee. At CloudBees, we require that all pull requests be reviewed by other CloudBees employees before we seek to have the change accepted. If you want to learn more about our process please see this explanation.

Copy link
Member

@stephenc stephenc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🐝 but likely irrelevant going forward.

Is there an analogous change for the new JNLP4 protocols?

@oleg-nenashev
Copy link
Member Author

oleg-nenashev commented Dec 16, 2016

@stephenc

Is there an analogous change for the new JNLP4 protocols?

Do you mean equivalent of #100 or of this change? Likely the second

@stephenc
Copy link
Member

Well #100 does not make sense for the new protocols as they all use ByteBufferQueue to ensure sequencial contract.

Thinking some more, the new protocols should be immune from this class of issue... let's go

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants