search for: send_request

...block, which in turn jumps right back into ISSUE_COMMAND > because we have a pending request not fully sent yet). Since the > jaunt through REPLY was non-blocking, it is unlikely that the POLLOUT > situation has changed in the meantime, so if we use SET_NEXT_STATE() > to step back into SEND_REQUEST, our recv() call will likely fail with > EAGAIN, once again blocking us until our next POLLOUT. Although the > wasted syscall is not on the hot-path (after all, we can't progress > until data arrives from the server), it's slightly cleaner if we > instead declare that we are al...

Hi, Would greatly appreciate some help with this. Is the following error caused by an incorrect worker name? You have a nil object when you didn''t expect it! The error occurred while evaluating nil.send_request /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/packet-0.1.5/lib/packet/packet_master.rb:44:in `ask_worker'' Here''s what I''m doing in my rails console. MiddleMan.new_worker(:worker => :foo_worker, :job_key => ''1'') worker = MiddleMan.worker(:worker => :foo_worke...

...to_issue; - conn->cmds_to_issue = cmd->next; - cmd->next = conn->cmds_in_flight; - conn->cmds_in_flight = cmd; conn->sbuf.request.magic = htobe32 (NBD_REQUEST_MAGIC); conn->sbuf.request.flags = htobe16 (cmd->flags); @@ -40,29 +37,43 @@ return 0; ISSUE_COMMAND.SEND_REQUEST: - struct command_in_flight *cmd; - switch (send_from_wbuf (conn)) { case -1: SET_NEXT_STATE (%.DEAD); return -1; - case 0: - assert (conn->cmds_in_flight != NULL); - cmd = conn->cmds_in_flight; - assert (cmd->handle == be64toh (conn->sbuf.request.handle)); - if (cmd...

...turn jumps right back into ISSUE_COMMAND >> because we have a pending request not fully sent yet). Since the >> jaunt through REPLY was non-blocking, it is unlikely that the POLLOUT >> situation has changed in the meantime, so if we use SET_NEXT_STATE() >> to step back into SEND_REQUEST, our recv() call will likely fail with >> EAGAIN, once again blocking us until our next POLLOUT. Although the >> wasted syscall is not on the hot-path (after all, we can't progress >> until data arrives from the server), it's slightly cleaner if we >> instead declar...

I have a PageController that displays a form. The form is just straight HTML, I only used the form helpers for the form tag as so: -- <%= form_tag({:action => :send_request}, {:method=>:post, :name=>''childsplay''})%> -- In my page controller I have this: -- def send_request email = InfoMailer::deliver_sendrequest(params) end --- in my action mailer class I have this: controllers/info_mailer.rb --- class InfoMailer < ActionMailer::...

...as soon as it would block, which in turn jumps right back into ISSUE_COMMAND because we have a pending request not fully sent yet). Since the jaunt through REPLY was non-blocking, it is unlikely that the POLLOUT situation has changed in the meantime, so if we use SET_NEXT_STATE() to step back into SEND_REQUEST, our recv() call will likely fail with EAGAIN, once again blocking us until our next POLLOUT. Although the wasted syscall is not on the hot-path (after all, we can't progress until data arrives from the server), it's slightly cleaner if we instead declare that we are already blocked. I te...

Dear All, I am originating the call directly to the SIP Provider using the maganger interface + originate (ASYNC) command. Here is the PHP-AGI Script. $call = $asm->send_request('Originate', array('Channel'=>"SIP/416XXXXXXX at ABC/n", 'Context'=>'ORIG', 'Exten'=>'s', * 'Async'=>'1',* 'M...

...erine dist [root@relay tinc-1.0pre3]# rpm -qa | grep gcc gcc-2.95.1-3 gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I.. -I../lib -I../intl -g -O2 -DPKGLIBDIR=/usr/local/lib/tinc -DCONFDIR=\"/usr/local/etc\" -DLOCALEDIR=\"/usr/local/share/locale\" -c protocol.c protocol.c: In function `send_request': protocol.c:77: parse error before `int' make[2]: *** [protocol.o] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/tinc-1.0pre3/src' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/tinc-1.0pre3' make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 Help is welcome. --- Kri...

Hello ! 1) I have this error logged by bdrb: undefined method `send_request'' for nil:NilClass framework/packet_master.rb:58:in `ask_worker'' backgroundrb/server/master_worker.rb:59:in `process_work'' backgroundrb/server/master_worker.rb:16:in `receive_data'' backgroundrb/framework/bin_parser.rb:29:in `call'' backgroundrb/framework/b...

...d) In the :do_work method, I''m calling register_status but am receiving nil when I call ask_status I guess I just feel like I''m shooting in the dark here - not sure if i''m going in the right direction at all. Should I be using ask_work with register_status? Perhaps send_request (though I don''t want the http request to wait for the worker to be completed)? Does the worker need to be running on a schedule before I can use either of these? I would appreciate any direction. thanks, tim

Let's check for a quite a few more errors. Among other things, this adds some coverage for a few things I've patched recently. --- And these enhancements set me up for my next fix: making NBD_CMD_DISC prevent future commands. tests/errors.c | 167 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 154 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/errors.c

...s? I''m running svn revision 314. Thanks, Ian --- backgroundrb_debug.log --- Client disconected 000000079^D^H{ : type:^Ldo_work:^Kworker:^Tagronomy_worker: datai^B<9E>^A:^Rworker_method:^Mtransmit typedo_workdata414workeragronomy_workerworker_methodtransmit undefined method `send_request'' for nil:NilClass /vendor/plugins/backgroundrb/framework/packet/packet_master.rb:43:in `ask_worker'' /vendor/plugins/backgroundrb/server/master_worker.rb:105:in `process_work'' /vendor/plugins/backgroundrb/server/master_worker.rb:37:in `receive_data'' /vendor/plugin...

What does the method query_all_workers() do? There is no documentation on what this method returns (1.0.1 version). Orion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/backgroundrb-devel/attachments/20080118/9f9b8112/attachment.html

Hello, I think I may have discovered a bug in BackgrounDRb. It seems that when the data being requested is large (via send_request), say in the range of 64k+, it crashes or at least incapacitates BackgrounDRb. For example, take these two workers: class SmallWorker < BackgrounDRb::MetaWorker set_worker_name :small_worker set_no_auto_load(true) attr_reader :payload def create(args) @payload = ''s '...

...0]); > + exit (EXIT_FAILURE); > + } This test fails when run under valgrind. An abbreviated log shows what's happening: libnbd: debug: nbd_aio_pwrite: event CmdIssue: READY -> ISSUE_COMMAND.START libnbd: debug: nbd_aio_pwrite: transition: ISSUE_COMMAND.START -> ISSUE_COMMAND. SEND_REQUEST libnbd: debug: nbd_aio_pwrite: transition: ISSUE_COMMAND.SEND_REQUEST -> ISSUE_C OMMAND.PREPARE_WRITE_PAYLOAD libnbd: debug: nbd_aio_pwrite: transition: ISSUE_COMMAND.PREPARE_WRITE_PAYLOAD - > ISSUE_COMMAND.SEND_WRITE_PAYLOAD libnbd: debug: nbd_aio_pwrite: transition: ISSUE_COMMAND.SEND_WRITE...

Hello List, In PHPAGI, I'm using the Astrisk Manager function send_request() to originate an outbound call. I want to execute the remaining PHP code after the call gets executed (depending on user input). But presently the call originates in a different context and asterisk executes the remaining code in parallel. Is there a way in which I can pause the code execution unt...

...rom /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/packet-0.1.5/lib/packet/packet_nbio.rb:72:in `dump_object'' from /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/packet-0.1.5/lib/packet/packet_worker.rb:31:in `send_data'' from /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/packet-0.1.5/lib/packet/packet_worker.rb:40:in `send_request'' ... 23 levels... from /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/packet-0.1.5/lib/packet/packet_master.rb:20:in `run'' from /Users/joel/git/deathstar/vendor/plugins/backgroundrb/server/lib/master_worker.rb:166:in `initialize'' from script/backgroundrb:60:in `new'' from scr...

...e how the current version handles multiple instances and threads. For example, if I call MiddleMan.new_worker(), does it actually create a new instance of my worker class (as the old version did), and if so, is that instance in a new thread of its own? How about MiddleMan.ask_work() and MiddleMan.send_request()? -- // jack // http://www.nuthole.com

...t this method # if you want to trigger your workers from rails. def receive_internal_data p_data self.send(p_data[:method],p_data[:data]) end def send_mail data end end And you can invoke a method in worker from rails using: # invoke method send_mail in newsletter_worker WorkerProxy.send_request(:worker => :newsletter_worker, :method => :send_mail, :data => @newsletter.id) # No Kidding, guys above code works. Also, as usual you define your workers in a worker directory and they will be picked and run. Now, It should be noted that, part of stability that comes to new version is b...

...| 1 + 4 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/generator/generator b/generator/generator index a4ad362..23b3cbf 100755 --- a/generator/generator +++ b/generator/generator @@ -634,7 +634,15 @@ and issue_command_state_machine = [ default_state with name = "SEND_REQUEST"; comment = "Sending a request to the remote server"; - external_events = [ NotifyWrite, "" ]; + external_events = [ NotifyWrite, ""; + NotifyRead, "PAUSE_SEND_REQUEST" ]; + }; + + State { + default_state with +...