Bug #3052
closed[Crunch] stdout from non-task programs invoked by crunch-job should propagate to job log.
Updated by Tom Clegg over 10 years ago
- Target version set to Arvados Future Sprints
Updated by Ward Vandewege about 10 years ago
- Subject changed from stdout from crunch tasks should propagate to job log. to [Crunch] stdout from crunch tasks should propagate to job log.
Updated by Ward Vandewege about 10 years ago
- Target version changed from Arvados Future Sprints to 2014-10-08 sprint
Updated by Peter Amstutz about 10 years ago
- Status changed from New to In Progress
Updated by Peter Amstutz about 10 years ago
- The culprit is this code in #read_pipes of crunch-dispatch.rb:
# Throw away child stdout begin j[:stdout].read_nonblock(2**20) rescue Errno::EAGAIN, EOFError end
- Related to this, in crunch-job, tasks currently have their stdout and stderr fused into a single stream that goes to stderr. We want to restore the separation.
Updated by Tom Clegg about 10 years ago
- Subject changed from [Crunch] stdout from crunch tasks should propagate to job log. to [Crunch] stdout from non-task programs invoked by crunch-job should propagate to job log.
Peter Amstutz wrote:
- Related to this, in crunch-job, tasks currently have their stdout and stderr fused into a single stream that goes to stderr. We want to restore the separation.
(but not here... added #4028)
Updated by Tom Clegg about 10 years ago
(Recording question from IRC)
Why is this (a4679fb) better than combining the crunch-job child's stderr and stdout into a single unix pipe and leaving the existing buffer/propagation code alone?
This way, if a line arrives on stderr when stdout has printed a partial line, we get the intact stderr line followed by an intact stdout line, rather than a stdout line interrupted by a stderr line.
Updated by Tim Pierce about 10 years ago
Review at a4679fb. Just one style nit:
crunch_dispatch.rb:337: can we use JSON dictionary style here? buf: {stdout: '', stderr: ''}
If only because it always makes me dizzy when we combine dictionary styles in the same piece of code.
Otherwise LGTM!
Updated by Anonymous about 10 years ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
Applied in changeset arvados|commit:62790d76daf181a457d8f47741721967cd9cb7d9.