Backgroundrb devel - Dec 2006 - Unintended thread forked in autostart

Hello all,

I''ve got the problem about the following simple application using
autostart and repeat_every.

A thread(?) is forked for processing task at first, but at sencond time
two threads seem to be forked.

My simple application code is...

- In worker class
  class FooWorker < BackgrounDRb:Rails
  repeat_every 2.minutes
  first_run Time.now

  def do_work
     puts Time.now.to_s + "Start processing....."
     do_some_task()
     puts Time.now.to_s + "Finish processing"
  end

- In background.yml

 autostart:
   1:
     class: foo_worker
     arg: ''''

Result is....
  --- First time---
  Start processing
  Finish processing

  --- Second time ---
  Start processing
  Start processing
  Finish processing
  Finish processing

regards.

-- 
--------------------------------------
Kenichi Sugihara
--------------------------------------

On Dec 12, 2006, at 11:54 PM, Kenichi Sugihara wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I''ve got the problem about the following simple application using
> autostart and repeat_every.
>
> A thread(?) is forked for processing task at first, but at sencond  
> time
> two threads seem to be forked.
>
> My simple application code is...
>
> - In worker class
>   class FooWorker < BackgrounDRb:Rails
>   repeat_every 2.minutes
>   first_run Time.now
>
>   def do_work
>      puts Time.now.to_s + "Start processing....."
>      do_some_task()
>      puts Time.now.to_s + "Finish processing"
>   end
>
> - In background.yml
>
>  autostart:
>    1:
>      class: foo_worker
>      arg: ''''
>
> Result is....
>   --- First time---
>   Start processing
>   Finish processing
>
>   --- Second time ---
>   Start processing
>   Start processing
>   Finish processing
>   Finish processing
>
> regards

Hey There-

	The older version of backgroundrb had a problem with the  
repeat_every directive. SO it doesn''t work as expected. If you really  
need the timing functionality I suggest you upgrade to the 0.2.1  
version of the plugin. You can get it here.

http://svn.devjavu.com/backgroundrb/tags/release-0.2.1/

http://svn.devjavu.com/backgroundrb/tags/release-0.2.1/README

Cheers-
-- Ezra Zygmuntowicz 
-- Lead Rails Evangelist
-- ez at engineyard.com
-- Engine Yard, Serious Rails Hosting
-- (866) 518-YARD (9273)

Is the latest release of the new code production ready? I''m finally 
working seriously on deploying workers in our site and right now we''re 
on the old branch.

-- 
Joshua Warchol
Code Poet, Zaadz Inc.
http://joshua.zaadz.com/

On Dec 13, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Joshua Warchol wrote:
> Is the latest release of the new code production ready? I''m
finally
> working seriously on deploying workers in our site and right now
we''re
> on the old branch.
>
> --  
> Joshua Warchol
> Code Poet, Zaadz Inc.
> http://joshua.zaadz.com/
>

Hey Josh-

	I guess that depends on what kind of workers you are using. If the  
old plugin is working for you then there may not be a good reason  
right now to upgrade. There are many production sites still running  
the old version perfectly well.

	So tell me a bit about what you are using it for? If its lighter  
weight duty then the old branch is great. If it requires a ton of  
processing power then the new multi process model might be better.

Thanks
-- Ezra Zygmuntowicz 
-- Lead Rails Evangelist
-- ez at engineyard.com
-- Engine Yard, Serious Rails Hosting
-- (866) 518-YARD (9273)

Ezra Zygmuntowicz wrote:
> So tell me a bit about what you are using it for? If its lighter 
> weight duty then the old branch is great. If it requires a ton of 
> processing power then the new multi process model might be better.
Well, basically the key worker in this situation is going to be creating 
delivery records in a "notifications" table as part of sending 
newsletters. So it''s a long running (1-10 minutes) job of creating 
thousands of rows in the table.

I think it can be done just fine in the older code, so I''m probably 
going to stick there and cheer on the new code from the sideline for a 
bit. I have played with the new hotness a bit and it''s looking great.

Josh

-- 
Joshua Warchol
Code Poet, Zaadz Inc.
http://joshua.zaadz.com/