-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Add least processing time distribution algorithm #1
base: class_distribution
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looking good! left a minor comment about the error handling
distributed_nose/plugin.py
Outdated
"'--lpt-data <lpt-data-filepath>' to be specified as " | ||
"well. Falling back to hash-ring algorithm." | ||
)) | ||
self.algorithm = self.ALGORITHM_HASH_RING |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thoughts on just crashing here+below instead of falling back? my guess is it's intended to defend against things higher up in the stack (eg failing to download a data file), which does seem like what we want but might not be the best place to handle it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
right, good point. lemme give that some thought.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
actually, yeah, falling back is definitely bad in the case of the failed download since that might have happened at only one node and then the different nodes might successfully execute different algorithms.
good call. i'll revise this to just crash and fail for these cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah, yeah, good point. fwiw, so long as nose doesn't write out a nosetests.xml our builds will consider it unstable, so we could hook up retries at that level if needed.
25dad61
to
afbd403
Compare
hey @simon-weber -- made some error handling updates based on your comments. can you take another look? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks good!
fb33d1e
to
988ebc4
Compare
cc8617a
to
8ee3ccc
Compare
8ee3ccc
to
4c40b49
Compare
lgtm 👍 |
No description provided.