On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Matt Fischer
<matthew.fischer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:matthew.fischer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
A new script recently sparked a discussion on how long we should
allow for scripts to run and also about those scripts using other
resources like network bandwidth. Right now we have no
guidelines, but I'd like to start a discussion on perhaps setting
some.
We had a new script recently added that was tested out at initial
time of 2 minutes, run every 15 minutes. Much of the time the
script was running it was waiting on I/O, but still using
resources. We've since modified this script so that it takes 1
minute every hour, meaning it's 2x faster and now only runs
hourly. The question is, is this quick enough? Do we want to
have an execution time limit in the daemon? And finally is it okay
to have longer running scripts as long as they don't run on each
accomplishment check?
When you think about this also consider that these scripts have to
run on the validation server and that's a resource that is shared
with everyone using the system.
Thoughts?
The general rule of thumb I have used for assessing accomplishments is:
* The execution time should be short (typically no longer than 5 - 10
seconds).
* It should not be a performance burden on the resource it is
checking (e.g. it should not be hammering Launchpad).
* It should be efficient (e.g. not traversing through reams of data
to find something).
I think having some of this build into the daemon could be useful
(e.g. execution time limits), but I think we mainly just need be
conscious of this when assess accoms for the collections.
One thing I am planning on doing is adding a 'execution time' column
to the battery reports. This will help us keep an eye on these times.
Thanks!
Jono
--
Jono Bacon
Ubuntu Community Manager
www.ubuntu.com <http://www.ubuntu.com> / www.jonobacon.org
<http://www.jonobacon.org>
www.identi.ca/jonobacon <http://www.identi.ca/jonobacon>
www.twitter.com/jonobacon <http://www.twitter.com/jonobacon>
