Bug 1412729
Summary: | Provider refresh duration runs so long that multiple ems_worker processes for the same provider become active concurrently | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine | Reporter: | Satoe Imaishi <simaishi> |
Component: | Performance | Assignee: | Ladislav Smola <lsmola> |
Status: | ON_QA --- | QA Contact: | Pradeep Kumar Surisetty <psuriset> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 5.4.0 | CC: | cpelland, dajohnso, gblomqui, gtanzill, hroy, jdeubel, jhardy, jocarter, lsmola, mfeifer, mhild, psuriset, simaishi |
Target Milestone: | GA | Keywords: | ZStream |
Target Release: | 5.7.2 | ||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | ems_refresh:perf | ||
Fixed In Version: | 5.7.1.0 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | 1251154 | Environment: | |
Last Closed: | Type: | --- | |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 1251154 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Comment 2
CFME Bot
2017-01-12 16:15:53 UTC
New commit detected on ManageIQ/manageiq/euwe: https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/commit/1a4850ccd8191d9d78d552a986c0162c519d9ab9 commit 1a4850ccd8191d9d78d552a986c0162c519d9ab9 Author: Jason Frey <fryguy9> AuthorDate: Tue Nov 22 12:58:28 2016 -0500 Commit: Satoe Imaishi <simaishi> CommitDate: Thu Jan 12 11:14:14 2017 -0500 Merge pull request #12626 from Ladas/optimize_vm_and_generic_saving_code_by_removing_O_N_2 Optimize vm and generic saving code by removing O(n^2) (cherry picked from commit d042596ca267fcb191fc96f9dbb8238d342e4692) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1412729 app/models/ems_refresh/save_inventory.rb | 143 +++++++++++++----------- app/models/ems_refresh/save_inventory_helper.rb | 4 +- 2 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-) Pradeep, not sure I understand comment #6. Are you saying that this fix isn't in 5.7.1, but it *is* in a 5.7.2 build? Pradeep, not sure I understand comment #6. Are you saying that this fix isn't in 5.7.1, but it *is* in a 5.7.2 build? |