-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Notify metacontroller about the Laser error #8
Comments
@ipa-hsd can you send me the information that is published by the ros_graph monitor about the laser node that is missing? @ipa-nhg can you send the information about components that is in the .rossystem file? |
Output would look something like this:
|
Ros system model example for a component:
|
@marioney which version of |
I think we need to add some changes from the MROS project, specially if we plan to use the same ontology. |
I see two options:
I suspect B will actually be more complex, but I think you know better @marioney |
The diagnostics msg for a missing component should be something like this.
We have to define correctly the name of the component, (i.e. @ipa-hsd can you let me know when you update the observer to get this message |
Great I've merged the changes!! @ipa-hsd which nodes do we need to add to test it, and or how can we trigger this failure? |
Actually I made a dummy test. I used metacontrol_desired.rossystem (please note that the single quotes are missing for the
I ran an "empty system", meaning none of the required nodes were running, so I get a "missing node" error for all the nodes listed in the desired system. The commands which I used were:
For an actual test, the simulation should be running and the laser node should be shut down at run time. |
Maybe the post above could be added to the README for this repo, in a Test section? |
The 'rosgraph_monitor' needs to send a diagnostics message to the metacontrol reasoner to notify the laser failure.
Currently, the metacontroller does not accept messages related to single nodes, but to configurations, as we decided that the metacontrol would operate at that level of granularity. See:
https://github.com/tud-cor/mc_mros_reasoner/blob/67d4af8a6b064c2b29bab5c80956481c826ad6c0/mros1_reasoner/src/mros1_reasoner/ros_reasoner.py#L141-L147
(binding refers to a configuration that is currently deployed)
We can discuss this interface @ipa-hsd
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: