Closed (fixed)
Project:
Hosting Site Backup Manager
Version:
7.x-3.x-dev
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
14 Mar 2016 at 20:17 UTC
Updated:
7 Sep 2017 at 09:29 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #2
colanPerhaps this is a duplicate?
Comment #3
gboudrias commentedThey're both from me, I consider them separate problems.
This issue is about the delete backups task and the other one is about the backup task, which should be handled differently.
It's true that we need to never clog up the queue but I think the solution will be different for each, I doubt we can have a greater solution (forbid duplicates) as that would take away from the advantage of having versioned tasks (and the knowledge that your version of the task will run eventually).
Of course I'm open to all solutions. In this case I was about to patch it so as to cancel the older "delete backup" task (since the new task will presumably encompass all backups).
Comment #4
gboudrias commentedAfter some thought I think we *can* have a larger solution: #2694037: Forbid duplicates of certain task types
In short, we should probably forbid duplicates of *some* task types.
Comment #5
ergonlogicAn even better solution involves addressing "When the queue daemon crashes", which just shouldn't be happening. While certainly out-of-scope for this issue, I thought I'd mention some interesting projects that helmo pointed out in yesterday's scrum, that parallel Skynet somewhat: https://github.com/MartijnBraam/drush-queued, https://github.com/MartijnBraam/hosting_realtime_queue and https://github.com/MartijnBraam/sse-proxy.
Comment #6
gboudrias commentedAgreed. I'm adding #2672530: Adopt Python queue daemon replacement as a related issue, I think we should discuss it more there.
Comment #7
steven jones commentedI've just run into this, and the queue ended up with 300,000 backup delete tasks in it before anyone noticed!
Aegir is now taking quite a long time to simply work out which task to run next, let alone run the task!
Anyway, seems like this should be a simple fix for this module and then something better can come later :)
Comment #8
steven jones commentedSomething like this should do the trick.
Comment #9
helmo commentedLooks good
Comment #11
helmo commented