Currently, I am trying to trace Logical Block Address (LBA) access per process. I am aware of biosnoop.py that probes "blk_start_request". With the program I try to intercept I only get to see kworkers.
Two ideas to resolve this problem:
Find out what process the kworker has its current task from. This seems rather complicated to do in ebpf (if possible at all).
Probe another function in the kernel where the LBA can be intercepted or obtained in any way. I tried looking around in the virtual file system but did not find anything useful. Any recommendations?
I have an airlock (small room called AL_2216) between 2 areas. The airlock has many different agent types passing through it (cart, product, operator, etc). There are queuing areas on either side of the airlock.
Because the space is small, I built a short flowchart that has a queue and restricted area blocks that all agents must pass through when going through this space. If the restricted area's capacity is full, the agents wait in either the InsideQueueArea or OutsideQueueArea depending on the direction they're going.
I send agents via Exit and Enter blocks to this flowchart and it works great on the top portion of the flowchart.
BUT if I try to use an Enter or Exit block in the prepare flowchart, I get this error:
I tried using a custom block instead of Enter and Exit blocks, but that creates a new instance of the code each time and the restrictions don't work together across the multiple custom blocks.
This airlock is just one of many in my model. Without referring to the same code, I'll have multiple copies that need to refer to each other's restricted areas and the flowcharts become huge and complicated. Is there a way to get around this?
EDIT:
I'm not sure what to do with these ports. They have no properties that do anything:
EDIT2:
Here's a file to see the behavior - Model2.zip
The Prepared flowchart portion is set to "ignore" so the code will run. You can see the operators and the carts passing through AL_2216 with only 2 being allowed at a time. If you uncheck "ignore" for the prepare flowchart, the error will trigger.
AnyLogic sent the right answer!!
So I was asking Anylogic a different question and they recognized my name from this post! They sent a fix to me and it works exactly the way it should! The exception error message I was getting "out: 0 isn't supported for..." made me think the exit/enter blocks were not supported in perparation flowcharts.
But actually, the seizeCart block didn't know where to start the prep flowchart because it wasn't directly connected to the resource task start block. A quick setting change under the Advanced section of the seizeCart block defining which resource task start block to start at did the trick! Here's the email from AnyLogic:
-The error text and documentation are not sufficient for understanding this (the error text is confusing), I suppose it is obsolete error text. We will rectify the description;
-Under the question there is a more generic discussion which seems to be unrelated to the initial problem. Please let me know if I miss something or if your model does not work as you expect even after adjustment of seizeCart block property.
I think you should replace the Enter and Exit blocks that lead to the bottom input of your seizeCart Seize block with simple Port objects (from the Agent palette).
As per the help for Seize:
So it wants a direct link to a ResourceTaskStart flow and your Enter/Exit combinations might be ... not "direct" enough... Try it.
So here's what I ended up doing. It's the best I could come up with that could be easily replicated for lots of airlocks.
I've added a wait block (dummyThruAL_2216) to my Product flowchart prior to seizing the cart. This wait block injects a new Agent into sourceDummy at the cartHome node. The dummy then seizes a cart and moves through the airlock and it's restriction. Upon exiting the restriction, I check what type of agent and direct the agent to the correct exit block. The dummy agent and cart move to the Product where the dummy agent releases the cart and sinks. The sink frees the wait block and the Product seizes the cart that is right next to it and continues on it's journey.
It's an easy copy/paste to add more airlocks. Not as nice as my original, but what are you going to do... Thanks for everyone's help and suggestions.
As others have said, there are (not really documented) restrictions on what blocks you can use in preparation and wrap-up flowcharts, which mean what you're attempting won't work.
As you say, it's important to keep a single 'instance' of the airlock flow so that the restrictions (queue and restricted area) are 'global' when this represents the same physical airlock. (Otherwise a repeated custom block is precisely what you should use for each different physical airlock.)
Your best option (and assuming you needed to attach the Cart resource to the Product) is probably to
Add dummy agents (via Source block inject calls) to a separate mini-process that represents your resource preparation requirement (but now not attached to the Seize block).
Replace the Seize in your main process with a Seize-Wait-Release-Seize combination:
The Seize block seizes the cart as normal (without moving or attaching it; no 'Send seized resources' or 'Attach seized resources' options) and then injects an agent into your mini-process (which can use Exit and Enter blocks to use the airlock sub-process). This agent represents the seized resource agent (Cart) and thus should start where it starts and be animated so it looks like it. (You can make the actual Cart temporarily non-visible during this mini-process.)
When the agent reaches the end of the mini-process (at a Sink block), instantly move the related Cart to your node (use jumpTo), make it visible again and free the Product agent from the Wait block
Release the seized Cart and then immediately re-Seize it, but now attaching it (so the animation looks correct). If you use the Resource selection 'Nearest to the agent' option you should be guaranteed to seize the correct cart. (You can also use the 'Customise resource choice' option with some code to ensure that you absolutely always choose the same Cart.)
(It is simpler than the above if you don't care about having a correct animation, and you can use custom blocks to make this block combination reusable and thus not too clunky.)
Edit: A very similar alternative which also works (and is the basis for your own answer) is to have a dummy agent representing your Product in the sub-flow which seizes (and attaches) the actual Cart agent, leaving it at the Product's location to be immediately seized as above. This is slightly better since you don't have to worry about the visibility and 'jumping' of the real resource agent, plus you can move a Seize and a Release from the main flow (which now just has Wait-Seize) to the sub-flow (thus 'hiding them away').
kube-controller-manager has the following property
-deployment-controller-sync-period duration Default: 30s
Period for syncing the deployments.
What does this actually control and what does period for syncing the deployments mean?
Haha most curious thing. You'd expect it does something like controlling how often the controller checks whether the status of Deployment objects are compatible with spec or if there is a change needed.
However currently the controller-manager is notified on changes by the apiserver so it always inherently knows this information already.
There is Issue #71510 where someone points out that parameter seems to be unused. I've done my own search for the parameter and a related search for the variable. As far as I can tell all of these uses are for copying this value around, conversions, declarations, etc, and none of them actually use it for anything at all.
A good test would be setting it to a year and see what happens. I haven't done that though.
In ROS, listing of nodes is as follows
rosnode list
In ROS, killing a node is as follows
rosnode kill node_name
When I execute kill subcommand on a particular node, the node list is updating properly and that node is getting shutdown.
But I don't know the reason why some processes are not terminating on terminal after shutdown also as shown below
I need to again press ctrl+c or ctrl+z to really shutdown them on terminal.
Why the process (on terminal) is not terminating even though the node got shutdown?
What You Are Seeing Is That Node Got Shutdown Request And Is Not Actually Stopped But Trying to stop.
What rosnode kill something Do Is Send SIGINT To The NodeHandle And What Node Should Do Is Deconstruct Its Classes And Free NodeHandle (In Properly Written Codes)
What I Think Is Happening In Your Particular Node Either The SIGINT Handler Is Changed Or Your NodeHandle Cannot Destroy All Of The Objects That's Been Linked To Your roscpp Lib And Requires You To Press CTRL+C To Allow Escalating To More Aggressive Terminations
All I Can Do to Help You Without Seeing The Code Is:
Make Sure You Have A destructor For Every Class You Use
make Sure You Release Every Hardware Connection You Have In Your Code(Serial Connection, camera Connection, Etc)
Make Sure You Deallocation Every Pointer And References To Memory(Not Necessary But better Safe Than Sorry)
If You Still Had The Problem Try Rewriting The SIGINT Signal Here's A Link To ROS-Wiki That Has Good Info About Your Problem
Read a bit through here (https://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/out-of-resource/) without ending up with a clear understanding; Trying here to gather more infos about what actually happens.
We run 2 n1-standard-2 instances, a 300Go disk is attached
More specifically, a "nodefs.inodesFree" problem seems specified. And this one is quite unclear. It seems to happen during builds (when the image is creating), should we understand that it takes too much space on disk ? What would be the most obvious reason ?
It feels like it is not tied to the CPU/memory requests/limits that can be specified on a node, but still as we've "overcommitted" the limits, can it have any impact regarding this issue ?
Thanks for sharing your experience on this one
Could you run df -i on the affected node please?