[Ovmsdev] Time for 3.2.003? / Issue #241
Michael Balzer
dexter at expeedo.de
Wed Sep 25 15:31:52 HKT 2019
Mark,
go ahead, I'll follow. I don't have any bad reports from edge or eap.
Regards,
Michael
Am 25.09.19 um 03:47 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
> This is what I have (api.openvehicles.com <http://api.openvehicles.com>):
>
> ==> eap/ovms3.ver <==
> 3.2.005
> Tue Sep 19 08:00:00 UTC 2019 OTA release
>
> ==> edge/ovms3.ver <==
> 3.2.005-1-g7f86e9c
> Thu Sep 19 16:01:18 UTC 2019 Automated build (markhk8)
>
> ==> main/ovms3.ver <==
> 3.2.002
> Sun May 12 08:00:00 UTC 2019 OTA release
>
>
> The 3.2.005 seems stable, so I think it can now go eap->main.
>
> @Michael: Should we co-ordinate and do this later today, or have you already released 3.2.005 to main?
>
> Regards, Mark.
>
>> On 25 Sep 2019, at 2:21 AM, Bernd Geistert <b_ghosti at gmx.de <mailto:b_ghosti at gmx.de>> wrote:
>>
>> IMHO, currently:
>> - in MAIN is 3.2.002
>> - in EAP is 3.2.003
>> - in EDGE is 3.2.005-1-g7f86e9c
>>
>>
>> Am 19.09.2019 um 10:22 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>> OK, I’ve built:
>>>
>>> 2019-09-19 MWJ 3.2.005 OTA release
>>> - Default module/debug.tasks to FALSE
>>> Users that volunteer to submit tasks debug historical data to the Open Vehicles
>>> project, should (with appreciation) set:
>>> config set module debug.tasks yes
>>> This will be transmit approximately 700MB of data a month (over cellular/wifi).
>>>
>>> 2019-09-19 MWJ 3.2.004 OTA release
>>> - Skipped for Chinese superstitous reasons
>>>
>>>
>>> In EAP now, and I will announce.
>>>
>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>
>>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 3:34 PM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Correct.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 19.09.19 um 09:29 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>>>> I’m just worried about the users who don’t know about this new feature. When they deploy this version, they suddenly start sending 6MB of
>>>>> data a month up to us.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the ‘fix’ is just to change ovms_module.c:
>>>>>
>>>>> MyConfig.GetParamValueBool("module", "debug.tasks", true)
>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>> MyConfig.GetParamValueBool("module", "debug.tasks", false)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That would then only submit these logs for those that explicitly turn it on?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 3:23 PM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I didn't think about this being an issue elsewhere -- german data plans typically start at minimum 100 MB/month flat (that's my
>>>>>> current plan at 3 € / month).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No need for a new release, it can be turned off OTA by issueing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> config set module debug.tasks no
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 19.09.19 um 09:08 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>>>>>> Yep:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 758 bytes * (86400 / 300) * 30 = 6.5MB/month
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is going over data (not SD). Presumably cellular data for a large portion of the time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we need to default this to OFF, and make a 3.2.004 to avoid this becoming an issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 19 Sep 2019, at 2:04 PM, Stephen Casner <casner at acm.org <mailto:casner at acm.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's 6.55MB/month, unless you have unusually short months! :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In what space is that data stored? A log written to SD? That's not
>>>>>>>> likely to fill up the SD card too fast, but what happens if no SD card
>>>>>>>> is installed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- Steve
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019, Mark Webb-Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> To enable CPU usage statistics, apply the changes to sdkconfig
>>>>>>>>>> included.
>>>>>>>>>> New history record:
>>>>>>>>>> - "*-OVM-DebugTasks" v1: <taskcnt,totaltime> + per task:
>>>>>>>>>> <tasknum,name,state,stack_now,stack_max,stack_total,
>>>>>>>>>> heap_total,heap_32bit,heap_spi,runtime>
>>>>>>>>>> Note: CPU core use percentage = runtime / totaltime
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I’ve just noticed that this is enabled by default now (my production build has the sdkconfig updated, as per defaults).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am seeing 758 bytes of history record, every 5 minutes. About 218KB/day, or 654KB/month.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Should this be opt-in?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 8 Sep 2019, at 5:43 PM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've pushed some modifications and improvements to (hopefully) fix the timer issue or at least be able to debug it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Some sdkconfig changes are necessary.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The build including these updates is on my edge release as 3.2.002-258-g20ae554b.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Btw: the network restart strategy seems to mitigate issue #241; I've seen a major drop on record repetitions on my server since the
>>>>>>>>>> rollout.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> commit 99e4e48bdd40b7004c0976f51aba9e3da4ecab53
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Module: add per task CPU usage statistics, add task stats history records
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> To enable CPU usage statistics, apply the changes to sdkconfig
>>>>>>>>>> included. The CPU usage shown by the commands is calculated against
>>>>>>>>>> the last task status retrieved (or system boot).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Command changes:
>>>>>>>>>> - "module tasks" -- added CPU (core) usage in percent per task
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> New command:
>>>>>>>>>> - "module tasks data" -- output task stats in history record form
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> New config:
>>>>>>>>>> - [module] debug.tasks -- yes (default) = send task stats every 5 minutes
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> New history record:
>>>>>>>>>> - "*-OVM-DebugTasks" v1: <taskcnt,totaltime> + per task:
>>>>>>>>>> <tasknum,name,state,stack_now,stack_max,stack_total,
>>>>>>>>>> heap_total,heap_32bit,heap_spi,runtime>
>>>>>>>>>> Note: CPU core use percentage = runtime / totaltime
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> commit 950172c216a72beb4da0bc7a40a46995a6105955
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Build config: default timer service task priority raised to 20
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Background: the FreeRTOS timer service shall only be used for very
>>>>>>>>>> short and non-blocking jobs. We delegate event processing to our
>>>>>>>>>> events task, anything else in timers needs to run with high
>>>>>>>>>> priority.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> commit 31ac19d187480046c16356b80668de45cacbb83d
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> DukTape: add build config for task priority, default lowered to 3
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Background: the DukTape garbage collector shall run on lower
>>>>>>>>>> priority than tasks like SIMCOM & events
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> commit e0a44791fbcfb5a4e4cad24c9d1163b76e637b4f
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Server V2: use esp_log_timestamp for timeout detection,
>>>>>>>>>> add timeout config, limit data records & size per second
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> New config:
>>>>>>>>>> - [server.v2] timeout.rx -- timeout in seconds, default 960
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> commit 684a4ce9525175a910040f0d1ca82ac212fbf5de
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Notify: use esp_log_timestamp for creation time instead of monotonictime
>>>>>>>>>> to harden against timer service starvation / ticker event drops
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 07.09.19 um 10:55 schrieb Michael Balzer:
>>>>>>>>>>> I think the RTOS timer service task starves. It's running on core 0 with priority 1.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Taks on core 0 sorted by priority:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Number of Tasks = 20 Stack: Now Max Total Heap 32-bit SPIRAM C# PRI
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFC84A8 6 Blk ipc0 388 500 1024 7788 0 0 0 24
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFC77F0 5 Blk OVMS CanRx 428 428 2048 3052 0 31844 0 23
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFAFBF4 1 Blk esp_timer 400 656 4096 35928 644 25804 0 22
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFD3240 19 Blk wifi 460 2716 3584 43720 0 20 0 22
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFC03C4 2 Blk eventTask 448 1984 4608 104 0 0 0 20
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFC8F14 17 Blk tiT 500 2308 3072 6552 0 0 * 18
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFE14F0 26 Blk OVMS COrx 456 456 4096 0 0 0 0 7
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFE19D4 27 Blk OVMS COwrk 476 476 3072 0 0 0 0 7
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFCBC34 12 Blk Tmr Svc 352 928 3072 88 0 0 0 1
>>>>>>>>>>> 3FFE7708 23 Blk mdns 468 1396 4096 108 0 0 0 1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's our CanRx, as that only fetches and queues CAN frames, the actual work is done by the listeners. The CO tasks
>>>>>>>>>>> only run for CANopen jobs, which are few for normal operation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That leaves the system tasks, with main suspect -once again- the wifi blob.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We need to know how much CPU time the tasks actually use now. I think I saw some option for this in the FreeRTOS config.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 06.09.19 um 23:15 schrieb Michael Balzer:
>>>>>>>>>>>> The workaround is based on the monotonictime being updated per second, as do the history record offsets.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently, that mechanism doesn't work reliably. That may be an indicator for some bigger underlying issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Example log excerpt:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:07:48.126919 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,0,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:03.089031 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-10,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:05.041574 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-20,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:05.052644 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-30,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:05.063617 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-49,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:05.077527 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-59,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:05.193775 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-70,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:13.190645 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-80,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:22.077994 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-90,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:09:54.590300 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-109,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:11:10.127054 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-119,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:11:16.794200 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-130,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:11:22.455652 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-140,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:12:49.423412 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-150,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:12:49.442096 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-169,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:12:49.461941 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-179,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:14:39.828133 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-190,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:14:39.858144 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-200,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:14:52.020319 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-210,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:14:54.452637 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-229,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:15:12.613935 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-239,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:15:35.223845 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-250,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:16:09.255059 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-260,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:17:31.919754 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-270,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:19:23.366267 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-289,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:21:57.344609 +0200 info main: #173 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-299,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:23:40.082406 +0200 info main: #31 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-1027,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-09-06 22:25:58.061883 +0200 info main: #31 C MITPROHB rx msg h 964,-1040,RT-BAT-C,5,86400,2,1,3830,3795,3830,-10,25,25,25,0
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This shows the ticker was only run 299 times from 22:07:48 to 22:21:57.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> After 22:21:57 the workaround was triggered and did a reconnect. Apparently during that network reinitialization of 103 seconds,
>>>>>>>>>>>> the per second ticker was run 628 times.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That can't be catching up on the event queue, as that queue has only 20 slots. So something strange is going on here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 06.09.19 um 08:04 schrieb Michael Balzer:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark & anyone else running a V2 server,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as most cars don't send history records, this also needs the change to the server I just pushed, i.e. server version 2.4.2.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System/commits/master
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System/commits/master>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 05.09.19 um 19:55 schrieb Michael Balzer:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've pushed the nasty workaround: the v2 server checks for no RX over 15 minutes, then restarts the network (wifi & modem) as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configured for autostart.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rolled out on my server in edge as 3.2.002-237-ge075f655.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please test.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 05.09.19 um 01:58 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark, you can check your server logs for history messages with ridiculous time offsets:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [sddexter at ns27 server]$ cat log-20190903 | egrep "rx msg h [0-9]+,-[0-9]{4}" | wc -l
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 455283
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I checked my logs and see 12 vehicles showing this. But, 2 only show this for a debugcrash log (which is expected, I guess, if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the time is not synced at report time). I’ve got 4 cars with the offset > 10,000.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4 Sep 2019, at 4:45 AM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de> <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Everyone,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've pushed a change that needs some testing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I had the issue myself now parking at a certain distance from my garage wifi AP, i.e. on the edge of "in", after wifi had been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disconnected for some hours, and with the module still connected via modem. The wifi blob had been trying to connect to the AP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for about two hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As seen before, the module saw no error, just the server responses and commands stopped coming in. I noticed the default
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interface was still "st1" despite wifi having been disconnected and modem connected. The DNS was also still configured for my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wifi network, and the interface seemed to have an IP address -- but wasn't pingable from the wifi network.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A power cycle of the modem solved the issue without reboot. So the cause may be in the modem/ppp subsystem, or it may be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related (in some weird way) to the default interface / DNS setup.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> More tests showed the default interface again/still got set by the wifi blob itself at some point, overriding our modem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prioritization. The events we didn't handle up to now were "sta.connected" and "sta.lostip", so I added these, and the bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't show up again since then. That doesn't mean anything, so we need to test this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The default interface really shouldn't affect inbound packet routing of an established connection, but there always may be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strange bugs lurking in those libs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The change also reimplements the wifi signal strength reading, as the tests also showed that still wasn't working well using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the CSI callback. It now seems to be much more reliable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please test & report. The single module will be hard to test, as the bug isn't reproducable easily, but you can still try if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wifi / modem transitions work well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark, you can check your server logs for history messages with ridiculous time offsets:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [sddexter at ns27 server]$ cat log-20190903 | egrep "rx msg h [0-9]+,-[0-9]{4}" | wc -l
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 455283
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The bug now severely affects the V2 server performance, as the server is single threaded and doesn't scale very well to this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kind of bulk data bursts, especially when coming from multiple modules in parallel. So we really need to solve this now. Slow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reactions or connection drops from my server lately have been due to this bug. If this change doesn't solve it, we'll need to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> add some reboot trigger on "too many server v2 notification retransmissions" -- or maybe a modem power cycle will do, that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't discard the data.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 03.09.19 um 07:46 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No problem. We can hold. I won’t commit anything for the next few days (and agree to hold-off on Markos’s pull). Let me know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you are ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3 Sep 2019, at 1:58 AM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark, please wait.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I may just have found the cause for issue #241, or at least something I need to investigate before releasing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I need to dig into my logs first, and try something.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 02.09.19 um 12:23 schrieb Michael Balzer:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nothing open from my side at the moment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't had the time to look in to Markos pull request, but from a first check also think that's going too deep to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> included in this release.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 02.09.19 um 04:15 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it is well past time for a 3.2.003 release. Things seems table in edge (although some things only partially
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implemented).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anything people want to include at the last minute, or can we go ahead and build?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20190925/f3d0ea5b/attachment.htm>
More information about the OvmsDev
mailing list