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

Event based lift / door logic #320

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 10, 2024
Merged

Event based lift / door logic #320

merged 5 commits into from
May 10, 2024

Conversation

luca-della-vedova
Copy link
Member

New feature implementation

Implemented feature

Part of open-rmf/rmf_simulation#114.

Implementation description

This PR performs a few small changes in how we interact with infrastructure:

  • For doors and lifts, increase our queue size (previously used system default that has a queue size of 1) and explicitly mark it reliable.
  • For lifts, make sure that we publish a message immediately when a request from a fleet adapter is received. Previously the request was only saved and sent the next time a lift update was received. This should make latency when operating lifts slightly better.
  • Similarly for fleet adapters, release the lift as soon as needed, previously the release was also done in a lift state callback.

Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
@luca-della-vedova luca-della-vedova marked this pull request as ready for review February 5, 2024 02:11
@luca-della-vedova
Copy link
Member Author

This should be ready for review.

It shouldn't be too controversial and these should be strictly improvements in the latency of the system, what will be more controversial instead is the changes on the rmf_simulation side that change the publishing method to be event based, so I'll make sure to test those more extensively.

Copy link
Contributor

@mxgrey mxgrey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've tested this out, no problems at all. It should be a pure upgrade to how messages are currently handled, and fully backwards compatible 👍

@mxgrey mxgrey merged commit 5e58af9 into main May 10, 2024
3 of 4 checks passed
@mxgrey mxgrey deleted the luca/event_based_updates branch May 10, 2024 18:39
cwrx777 added a commit to cwrx777/rmf_ros2 that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
arjo129 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2024
Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
Signed-off-by: Arjo Chakravarty <arjoc@google.com>
luca-della-vedova added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 21, 2024
This reverts commit 5e58af9.

Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
luca-della-vedova added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2024
This reverts commit 5e58af9.

Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants