Re: build.gnome.org

[Iago Toral Quiroga <itoral igalia com>]

El mié, 23-04-2008 a las 21:23 +0100, John Carr escribió:
> Hi All
> 
> Tonight I have good news and bad news...
[...]
> My victory is short lived however. After talking to API, I started up
> more slaves and quickly fell victim to various errors from the proxy:
> 
> 2008/04/23 21:07 +0100 [jhbuildbot.master.SocksFactory] Could not
> accept new connection (EMFILE)
> 
> And the web server was also not feeling well:
> 
> 2008/04/23 21:08 +0100 [twisted.web.server.Site] Could not accept new
> connection (EMFILE)

[...]

> NOTE that i'm making nasty assumptions about why its exploding. If
> someone with a working multi-port master and some spare pc's could
> quickly see how many slaves we can currently handle it would be a big
> help..

I can confirm the problem using the multi-port approach. In my case I
managed to attach 4 slaves. When I attached the 5th I got the same error
message in the log.

In my case I was using only two machines and 3 of the slaves ran in the
same machine as the master, which is the worse scenario, since we are
using the server resources to handle also the client-side work.

So, I think that with the current solution we could accept around 4/5
slaves (if the moduleset does not grow significantly) safely. More than
that would be risky IMHO.

Iago

> Playing with the instructions I linked to would also help. It's still
> quite possible the SOCKS code is leaking somewhere...
> 
> John
> 
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Iago Toral Quiroga <itoral igalia com> wrote:
> > Hi John!
> >
> >  El mar, 22-04-2008 a las 22:13 +0100, John Carr escribió:
> >
> > > Hi All
> >  >
> >  > Just a little status update.
> >  >
> >  > I've been looking at using a SOCKS Server/Client to get around the
> >  > ports issue.
> >  [...]
> >
> > > I plan to do a test with the SOCKS5 code to see if my plan works, and
> >  > then there are 2 paths i can take.
> >  >
> >  > (1) Use SOCKS5. There is code for client and server, but it means that
> >  > the master will depend on proxy65. Note that my jhbuild moduleset
> >  > should make it trivial to deploy anyway. We could also look at
> >  > including the SOCKS part of the code directly, but i'm not sure of the
> >  > copyright stuff.
> >
> >  If this SOCKS5 client/server code works for us then we can check both
> >  options, but in principle, as you say, a jhbuild moduleset for the
> >  buildbot would make this easy to handle.
> >
> >
> >  > Unfortunately the SOCKS5 client has no copyright
> >  > notice on it so we would need to contact him before we started
> >  > deploying it
> >
> >  Yes, good point. Googling a little bit it looks like the person that
> >  submitted that ticket is Daniel Henninger <jadestorm nc rr com>. I will
> >  try to contact him.
> >
> >
> >  > (2) Use SOCKS4. We'd be using the server that ships with twisted, but
> >  > would have to roll our own client..
> >
> >  I think SOCKSv5 client/server is the best option if it works fine for
> >  us, but I'll give you the final word on this, for you are the one
> >  actually testing them :)
> >
> >  Iago
> >
> >
>