I have removed this unnecessary thread sleep in commit
26f0c4e0a80b773733aff2b37f5458. I have tested with mock and k8s and found
no issues.
Thanks,
Raj.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu
wrote:
> +1. fine then..:)
>
> Thanks,
> Reka
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Ra
+1. fine then..:)
Thanks,
Reka
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam
wrote:
> Hi Reka,
>
> Yes, that's what we are going to do. We are going to start event receiver
> threads after syncing the registry with in-memory model.
>
> Thanks,
> Raj.
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:06 AM
Hi Reka,
Yes, that's what we are going to do. We are going to start event receiver
threads after syncing the registry with in-memory model.
Thanks,
Raj.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu
wrote:
> In that case, can't we simply start these Receiver threads atlast after
> do
In that case, can't we simply start these Receiver threads atlast after
done with all the registry loading the component activation?
Thanks,
Reka
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam
wrote:
> Akila, sure - will fix it.
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Akila Ravihansa Pere
Akila, sure - will fix it.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Akila Ravihansa Perera wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification Isuru!
>
> @Raj: will you be able to fix this as part of the fix that you are doing
> to AS related to topology receiver?
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Is
Thanks for the clarification Isuru!
@Raj: will you be able to fix this as part of the fix that you are doing to
AS related to topology receiver?
Thanks.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Isuru Haththotuwa
wrote:
> This can be similar to the issue Raj has explained in thread [1]. The
> HealthSt
This can be similar to the issue Raj has explained in thread [1]. The
HealthStat receiver is started before the information is loaded from the
registry. We should start the HealthStat and Topology threads after loading
the information from the registry. That might be the reason why we are
waiting 1
Any thoughts please?
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> I noticed $subject in [1]. Is there any reason for this? As per a comment
> it is waiting for Autoscaler deployer to be activated. Anyone has an idea
> what this is about?
>
> 15s delay at the ser
Hi devs,
I noticed $subject in [1]. Is there any reason for this? As per a comment
it is waiting for Autoscaler deployer to be activated. Anyone has an idea
what this is about?
15s delay at the server startup is a significant amount of delay. If this
is actually needed we need to fix this properl
