I do work on FUSElib base file system, and process might periodically stop or hang because of internal bugs or exceptional situation. It's critical for disc intensive read/write sotware to use disc mounted with fuse implementation. Any stop/restart might lead to date lose, even if I put fuse process running under supervisor. Any technics exists to minimize this?
The fuse backend architecture is a process running an event loop that on each request (open, read, etc) starts a worker thread to handle it. That is not something available for you to change using the fuse API.
The only way for you to handle crashes and hangs is to have an outside watchdog monitor program to remount your fs whenever it crashes or hangs. Inside your fuse fs implementation you should insert a recovery module that once in a while stores the fs state to disk and also knows to import it back when remounted.
Update:
Adding link to a system doing just that, as referred by comment above (thanks man!)
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Refuse-to-crash-with-Re-FUSE-Sundararaman-Visampalli/022fc284362d04569a1561c3d04dfe0f377d6112
Related
Googling for it results in many “how to persist data in a node app” but I’m looking on a way to store the program counter, memory status, event loop, call stack etc in persistent storage, and resume it later.
Benefits: if you see the runtime (a server, container, serverless function) is about to terminate, instead of using business logic to pause and resume (custom work), use the same way operating systems handle multiple processes / threads. Store everything, then resume it later form a different infrastructure (but with identical specs).
I’m sure there is something like this, but simply can’t find the right search term probably.
Ps this might be an OS feature that I’m looking for and not node specific, but if this can be done from within Node’s API (Eg v8 internals) I can basically get an unlimited / long running lambda ;) (which is a bad idea but I want to know if it’s possible).
(V8 developer here.)
V8 definitely doesn't support this.
What V8 does support is taking a heap snapshot, and deserializing that on renewed process startup (and I believe Node is making use of this functionality). That's quite different from freezing an entire running process though.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the same way operating systems handle multiple processes / threads". Operating systems don't usually let you snapshot a process and transfer it to a different machine.
On the same machine, you could literally just let the OS do it: pause the process (e.g. press Ctrl+Z if you started it at a Linux command line, or use equivalent Task Manager functionality if your OS provides it, or similar), and resume it later. If the process itself doesn't fire any repeated tasks/timers, then that's almost equivalent to simply doing nothing: a process that executes no work won't get scheduled by the kernel anyway; a server that isn't serving any requests can just sit around waiting.
If you actually need to transfer a running process to another machine, your best bet may be a VM which you can snapshot, transfer, resume.
Is there a possible way to stop/abort/terminate a required/loaded module?
I found here (https://stackoverflow.com/a/6677355/5781499) something:
var name = require.resolve('moduleName');
delete require.cache[name];
But this does not stop/abort a running timer or similar.
It just keeps doing what the script does.
The reason for me to need this, I want to implement a plugin system where you can start & stop plugins.
"Starting" is easy, just load with require(...) the code.
But what would be the best way to stop everything the plugin is doing?
I have though about a VM, but in node there is no way to abort either a vm execution.
Next thing that came to my mind, was "Worker Threads". They provide a .terminate method which does what I need. (But now I have to deal with inter process communication, which is very complex to keep everything synced)
Would be awesome if someone could give me a hint/tip.
Nodejs does not provide any feature to do what you want so you will have to do a bunch of things manually. As you've discovered, deleting the module for the module cache only affects what happens if you try to load the code again, it does not affect the already loaded code at all.
If you're going to keep the plug-ins in the same process, then you can implement a required method in your plug-ins called something like "shutdown" where the plug-in shuts itself down manually (stops timers, unregisters event handlers, etc...). Implemented correctly, this should disconnect it entirely from anything in your nodejs program. If you then delete the module from the require cache, you can then load a new module in its place. The one downside to this is that nodejs does not ever unload the original code - it just stays in memory. If you're not accessing that original module handle, that code never gets used again, but it isn't freed or GCed by nodejs.
A bit more robust system would be to put each plug-in in their own child-process or worker thread and just communicate with them via the built-in interprocess communication between parent and child process which is essentially just messaging. As long as you don't have to send large amounts of data between parent and child/worker or have super high bandwidth data, then the messaging is pretty simple to use and works well.
If using a separate child process, you can then kill the child process at anytime and the OS will reclaim all resources used by the process (not quite so true for a workerThread). This has its own downsides in that it will likely use a lot more memory since a whole new nodejs process or workerThread in nodejs is a much heavier weight thing than just loading a single module into your existing nodejs process.
Running it in a child process has the advantage that your main process is much more protected from errant code in the plug-in (either accidental or malicious) since they are different processes and the plug-in can't directly mess with the parent process. But, don't fool yourself here, unless you run it in a sandboxed VM, the plug-in can still wreak some havoc on the system since it has access to many resources on the system (disk, network, other peripherals, etc...).
I have a routine that crashes linux and force a reboot using a system function.
Now I have the problem that I need to crash linux when a certain process dies. Using a script starting the process and if the script ends restart the server is not appropriate since it takes some ms.
Another idea is spawning the shooting processes alongside and use polling of a counter and if the counter is not incremented reboot the server would be another idea.
This would result in an almost instant reaction.
Now the question is what would be a good timeframe. I have no idea how the scheduler of linux would guarantee a certain update of any such counter and what a good timeout would be.
Also I would like to hear some alternatives to this second process spawning. Is there a possibility to advice linux to run a certain routine in case of a crash of the given process or a listener meachanism for the even of problems with a given process?
The timeout idea is already implemented in the kernel. You can register any application as a software watchdog, but you'll have to lower the default timeout. Have a look at http://linux.die.net/man/8/watchdog for some ideas. That application can also handle user-defined tests. Realistically unless you're trying to run kernel like linux-rt, having timeouts lower than 100ms can be dangerous on a system with heavy load - especially if the check needs to poll another application.
In cases of application crashes, you can handle them if your init supports notifications. For example both upstart and systemd can do that by monitoring files (make sure coredumps are created in the right place).
But in any case, I'd suggest rethinking the idea of millisecond-resolution restarts. Do you really need to kill the system in that time, or do you just need to isolate it? Just syncing the disks will take a few extra milliseconds and you probably don't want to miss that step. Instead of just killing the host, you could make sure the affected app isn't working (SIGABRT?) and kill all networking (flush iptables, change default to DROP).
I have a daemon process which does the configuration management. all the other processes should interact with this daemon for their functioning. But when I execute a large action, after few hours the daemon process is unresponsive for 2 to 3 hours. And After 2- 3 hours it is working normally.
Debugging utilities for Linux process hang issues?
How to get at what point the linux process hangs?
strace can show the last system calls and their result
lsof can show open files
the system log can be very effective when log messages are written to track progress. Allows to box the problem in smaller areas. Also correlate log messages to other messages from other systems, this often turns up interesting results
wireshark if the apps use sockets to make the wire chatter visible.
ps ax + top can show if your app is in a busy loop, i.e. running all the time, sleeping or blocked in IO, consuming CPU, using memory.
Each of these may give a little bit of information which together build up a picture of the issue.
When using gdb, it might be useful to trigger a core dump when the app is blocked. Then you have a static snapshot which you can analyze using post mortem debugging at your leisure. You can have these triggered by a script. The you quickly build up a set of snapshots which can be used to test your theories.
One option is to use gdb and use the attach command in order to attach to a running process. You will need to load a file containing the symbols of the executable in question (using the file command)
There are a number of different ways to do:
Listening on a UNIX domain socket, to handle status requests. An external application can then inquire as to whether the application is still ok. If it gets no response within some timeout period, then it can be assumed that the application being queried has deadlocked or is dead.
Periodically touching a file with a preselected path. An external application can look a the timestamp for the file, and if it is stale, then it can assume that the appliation is dead or deadlocked.
You can use the alarm syscall repeatedly, having the signal terminate the process (use sigaction accordingly). As long as you keep calling alarm (i.e. as long as your program is running) it will keep running. Once you don't, the signal will fire.
You can seamlessly restart your process as it dies with fork and waitpid as described in this answer. It does not cost any significant resources, since the OS will share the memory pages.
I have an embedded Linux system running on an Atmel AT91SAM9260EK board on which I have two processes running at real-time priority. A manager process periodically "pings" a worker process using POSIX message queues to check the health of the worker process. Usually the round-trip ping takes about 1ms, but very occasionally it takes much longer - about 800ms. There are no other processes that run at a higher priority.
It appears the stall may be related to logging (syslog). If I stop logging the problem seems to go away. However it makes no difference if the log file is on JFFS2 or NFS. No other processes are writing to the "disk" - just syslog.
What tools are available to me to help me track down why these stalls are occurring? I am aware of latencytop and will be using that. Are there some other tools that may be more useful?
Some details:
Kernel version: 2.6.32.8
libc (syslog functions): uClibc 0.9.30.1
syslog: busybox 1.15.2
No swap space configured [added in edit]
root filesystem is on tmpfs (loaded from initramfs) [added in edit]
The problem is (as you said) syslogd. While your process is running at a RT priority, syslogd is not. Additionally, syslogd does not lock its heap and can (and will) be paged out by the kernel, especially with very few 'customers'.
What you could try is:
Start another thread to manage a priority queue, have that thread talk to syslog. Logging would then just be acquiring a lock and inserting something into a list. Given only two subscribers, you should not spend a lot of time acquiring the mutex.
Not using syslog, implement your own logging (basically the first suggestion, minus talking to syslog).
I had a similar problem and my first attempt to fix it was to modify syslogd itself to lock its heap. That was a disaster. I then tried rsyslogd, which improved some but I still got random latency peaks. I ended up just implementing my own logging using a priority queue to help ensure that more critical messages were actually written first.
Note, if you are not using swap (at all), the shortest path to fixing this is probably implementing your own logging.