Skip to content
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 Piece Worker holds completed tasks until all Deals finish adding pieces #5272

Closed
cwhiggins opened this issue Dec 30, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@cwhiggins
Copy link

I have switched to using an add piece worker, from having it tied to PC1 workers. It seems to me that the AP worker does not send completed tasks out, so long as it is busy with other work. Maybe this is normal behavior, maybe a bug?

While adding data for deals, the AP worker does not send any completed tasks to next worker so long as it is continues to have more deals jobs to add. This can lead to a real back up if a miner is actually focused on making deals with clients.

When an AP worker finishes adding the pieces for a deal, it should be sent to miner for staging in sector, not held on AP worker.

lotus version
Daemon:  1.4.0+git.e9989d0e4+api1.0.0
Local: lotus version 1.4.0+git.e9989d0e4
@cwhiggins
Copy link
Author

part of conversation on slack, similar issue, I believe
https://filecoinproject.slack.com/archives/CEGN061C5/p1610272676025500

I found sector seal hangs on AP worker, if AP worker is adding deal data it will not do send other jobs. I think it may be linear, only taking jobs in queue, so if you have 1Tb of data, and you queued them all up to AP, it will take, probably 12 hours for them to finish before the seal job will come up.

Patrick - Factor8 Solutions 3 minutes ago
PC1 shoudl fetch waitdeals sectors as soon as the seal delay is timedout (edited)

Chris 2 minutes ago
yes, i agree, but it seems to me data is still on AP worker some how. AP needs to release it but can't because it is busy adding data for deal.

@f8-ptrk
Copy link
Contributor

f8-ptrk commented Jan 10, 2021

@dirkmc

if this is true it needs to be fixed before #5309 makes sense to be implemented

@TippyFlitsUK TippyFlitsUK self-assigned this May 5, 2022
@TippyFlitsUK
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @cwhiggins

Thanks for the report. The issue is outdated.

If this is a issue in the current release - please open a new ticket.

Thank you !

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants