add test and docs update for detached fork process #24524

nanomosfet · 2018-11-20T18:26:00Z

Checklist

make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
tests and/or benchmarks are included
documentation is changed or added
commit message follows commit guidelines

This addresses issue #17592

doc/api/child_process.md

lpinca · 2018-11-20T20:09:05Z

test/parallel/test-child-process-fork-detached.js

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+// Copyright Joyent, Inc. and other Node contributors.


AFAIK this copyright is not needed for new tests.

Will remove it. Thanks for letting me know.

codegagan

I would suggest to use arrow functions wherever possible in file test/fixtures/parent-process-nonpersistent-fork.js

lpinca

SGTM with nits addressed.

nanomosfet · 2018-11-20T22:27:16Z

@codegagan Thanks for the suggestion. I was following how they declared anonymous in other tests.

Also do you mean test/parallel/test-child-process-fork-detached.js? The file you mentioned does not have any functions. I prefer arrow functions as well. Should I change those anonymous functions in my main test file?

nanomosfet · 2018-11-20T23:11:57Z

@vsemozhetbyt Thanks for catching that.

I updated the commit message. I couldn't tell if I should use test or docs for the sub system.

I also changed the docs so that is is less than 80 characters with indent preserved.
Let me know what else I can do. :)

vsemozhetbyt · 2018-11-20T23:23:54Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/18826/

vsemozhetbyt · 2018-11-20T23:24:41Z

cc @nodejs/child_process

nanomosfet · 2018-11-21T01:43:41Z

@vsemozhetbyt Looks like two of the checks failed. Not really sure what to make out of the details of the build. What is going on?

codegagan

@nanomosfet you can look at this test file which has used arrow functions

vsemozhetbyt · 2018-11-21T12:59:11Z

1 Windows job failure may be unrelated. Let's rerun just this job:
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-windows-fanned/22587/

nanomosfet · 2018-11-21T20:42:27Z

@vsemozhetbyt Nice it looks like that one passed. Is that a flaky test?

Thank you BTW

vsemozhetbyt · 2018-11-21T20:50:57Z

Flaky tests are usually marked as flaky in CI logs, but maybe we do not know yet that this one is flaky)

nanomosfet · 2018-11-21T22:07:32Z

@vsemozhetbyt I see. What is left to do so we can merge?

I can change the anon. functions to arrow functions but I am afraid to because of rerunning the CI tests again. I can always make another PR to update a few test with arrow functions. I have noticed a lot of PR's where they are updating tests to use arrow functions.

vsemozhetbyt · 2018-11-21T22:19:08Z

You can do this in another PR or just leave it for one of the Code-and-learn sessions (most of these latest PRs are from such session).

Our rules require at least 48 hours for the review process and 2 approvals. So, for now, we just need to wait a bit)

Trott · 2018-11-24T01:36:20Z

doc/api/child_process.md

@@ -325,6 +325,8 @@ changes:
 * `args` {string[]} List of string arguments.
 * `options` {Object}
  * `cwd` {string} Current working directory of the child process.
+  * `detached` {boolean} If `true`, prepares child to run


Probably better to duplicate the text that exists for the detached option under spawn() rather than have two different phrasings like this?

Yeah I'd agree. It's almost the same though. I think the difference is just the If true. Should I go ahead make that change?

Trott · 2018-11-24T01:38:07Z

test/parallel/test-child-process-fork-detached.js

+process.on('exit', function() {
+  assert.notStrictEqual(childId, -1);
+  // Killing the child process should not throw an error
+  process.kill(childId);


This strikes me as having significant potential for leaving stray processes around on CI. Not necessarily blocking, but surely something to keep an eye on after this lands....

Yeah I totally agree. One of my checks was to make sure that no node processes were running after I ran the test individually.

Trott · 2018-11-24T01:39:28Z

I would prefer either leaving the functions as they are, or else changing them here. Changing them to arrow functions in a separate PR is just churn for no good reason. Again, not blocking. Just my own preference.

test/parallel/test-child-process-fork-detached.js

This tests child process fork component in detached mode by spawning a parent process that creates a child process. We kill the parent process and check if the child is still running. Fixes: nodejs#17592

nanomosfet · 2018-11-24T11:42:13Z

@codegagan Updated PR to use arrow functions
@vsemozhetbyt fixed typo

nit: nonPersistantNode -> nonPersistentNode here and below.

@Trott - fork detached docs now match spwan detached. Both are now

 * `detached` {boolean} Prepare child to run independently of its parent
    process. Specific behavior depends on the platform, see
    [`options.detached`][]).

Re ran test and no stray node processes

Let me know what else I can do. Thank you for your time <3 :)

Edit: also rebased to tip of nodejs/node

vsemozhetbyt · 2018-11-24T11:50:12Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/18931/

Trott · 2018-11-24T19:44:18Z

Looks good to me. Can someone in @nodejs/child_process (or someone else knowledgable about potential pitfalls here) take a look?

This tests child process fork component in detached mode by spawning a parent process that creates a child process. We kill the parent process and check if the child is still running. Fixes: nodejs#17592 PR-URL: nodejs#24524 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

Trott · 2018-11-28T19:15:47Z

Landed in f051737.

Thanks for the contribution! 🎉

(If you're interested in other possible contributions to Node.js but don't have a good idea of where to start looking, some ideas are posted at https://www.nodetodo.org/next-steps/.)

This tests child process fork component in detached mode by spawning a parent process that creates a child process. We kill the parent process and check if the child is still running. Fixes: #17592 PR-URL: #24524 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

This tests child process fork component in detached mode by spawning a parent process that creates a child process. We kill the parent process and check if the child is still running. Fixes: nodejs#17592 PR-URL: nodejs#24524 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

This tests child process fork component in detached mode by spawning a parent process that creates a child process. We kill the parent process and check if the child is still running. Fixes: #17592 PR-URL: #24524 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

vsemozhetbyt reviewed Nov 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

doc/api/child_process.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

vsemozhetbyt added child_process Issues and PRs related to the child_process subsystem. doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. test Issues and PRs related to the tests. labels Nov 20, 2018

lpinca reviewed Nov 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

codegagan reviewed Nov 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

lpinca approved these changes Nov 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

nanomosfet force-pushed the add-fork-detached-test branch from 2b18e03 to 30c5b2d Compare November 20, 2018 22:29

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

nanomosfet force-pushed the add-fork-detached-test branch from 30c5b2d to d58c8ac Compare November 20, 2018 23:08

codegagan reviewed Nov 21, 2018

View reviewed changes

Trott reviewed Nov 24, 2018

View reviewed changes

vsemozhetbyt reviewed Nov 24, 2018

View reviewed changes

test/parallel/test-child-process-fork-detached.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

test: test and docs for detached fork process

f1f4837

This tests child process fork component in detached mode by spawning a parent process that creates a child process. We kill the parent process and check if the child is still running. Fixes: nodejs#17592

nanomosfet force-pushed the add-fork-detached-test branch from d58c8ac to f1f4837 Compare November 24, 2018 11:37

Trott closed this Nov 28, 2018

BridgeAR mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2018

v11.4.0 proposal #24854

Merged

4 tasks

BethGriggs mentioned this pull request Feb 12, 2019

v10.15.3 proposal #26063

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

add test and docs update for detached fork process #24524

add test and docs update for detached fork process #24524

nanomosfet commented Nov 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

lpinca Nov 20, 2018

nanomosfet Nov 20, 2018

codegagan left a comment

lpinca left a comment

nanomosfet commented Nov 20, 2018

This comment has been minimized.

nanomosfet commented Nov 20, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 20, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 20, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 21, 2018

codegagan left a comment •

edited

Loading

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 21, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 21, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 21, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 21, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 21, 2018

Trott Nov 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading

nanomosfet Nov 24, 2018

Trott Nov 24, 2018

nanomosfet Nov 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Trott commented Nov 24, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 24, 2018

Trott commented Nov 24, 2018

Trott commented Nov 28, 2018

		@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
		// Copyright Joyent, Inc. and other Node contributors.

add test and docs update for detached fork process #24524

add test and docs update for detached fork process #24524

Conversation

nanomosfet commented Nov 20, 2018 • edited Loading

Checklist

lpinca Nov 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nanomosfet Nov 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codegagan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lpinca left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nanomosfet commented Nov 20, 2018

This comment has been minimized.

nanomosfet commented Nov 20, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 20, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 20, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 21, 2018

codegagan left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 21, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 21, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 21, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 21, 2018

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 21, 2018

Trott Nov 24, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nanomosfet Nov 24, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott Nov 24, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nanomosfet Nov 24, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott commented Nov 24, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 24, 2018 • edited Loading

vsemozhetbyt commented Nov 24, 2018

Trott commented Nov 24, 2018

Trott commented Nov 28, 2018

nanomosfet commented Nov 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

codegagan left a comment •

edited

Loading

Trott Nov 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading

nanomosfet Nov 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading

nanomosfet commented Nov 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading