GV

GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites

On this site

  • Sign in
  • ActionsCI/CD and automation
  • CodespacesCloud development environments
  • All Features
  • Documentation
  • Training
  • Certifications
  • Build with Copilot
  • Customize Copilot
  • Integrations
  • Trending repos
  • GitHub Sponsors
  • Developer articles
  • Enterprises

This view

  • Original page
  • New address

GeezerVison is showing github.com — net: make Server.prototype.unref() persistent by cjihrig · Pull Request #897 · nodejs/node

Conversation

@cjihrig

@cjihrig cjihrig commented Feb 19, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Currently, the unref() method does not remember any state if called before the server's handle has been created. This commit adds state to track calls to ref() and unref().

Related to nodejs/node-v0.x-archive#7077

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

All reactions
@cjihrig
net: make Server.prototype.unref() persistent
b919ac8
Currently, the unref() method does not remember any state
if called before the server's handle has been created. This
commit adds state to track calls to ref() and unref().
@evanlucas

evanlucas commented Feb 20, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

LGTM

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

cjihrig added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2015
@cjihrig @brendanashworth
net: make Server.prototype.unref() persistent
d8eb974
Currently, the unref() method does not remember any state
if called before the server's handle has been created. This
commit adds state to track calls to ref() and unref().

PR-URL: #897
Reviewed-By: Evan Lucas <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Brendan Ashworth <[email protected]>
@brendanashworth

brendanashworth commented Feb 21, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks @cjihrig, merged in d8eb974a!

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

@brendanashworth brendanashworth closed this Feb 21, 2015
@cjihrig
cjihrig deleted the server-unref branch February 21, 2015 04:34
This was referenced Feb 23, 2015
Release proposal: v1.4.0 #932
Closed
Release proposal: v1.3.0 #872
Closed
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Nov 6, 2016
@Trott
test: move timer-dependent test to sequential
d5a76f8
`test-regress-nodejsGH-897` is dependent on a timer firing within a period of
time. Especially on some of the FreeBSD hosts on CI, we have seen tests
like that fail when run in parallel. (This may have nothing to do with
FreeBSD and may just mean that the hosts are resource-constrained.) Move
this test to sequential as we have done with several other
timer-dependent tests recently.

The test has also been refactored and documented via comments.
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2016
@Trott
test: move timer-dependent test to sequential
1ce05ad
`test-regress-nodejsGH-897` is dependent on a timer firing within a period of
time. Especially on some of the FreeBSD hosts on CI, we have seen tests
like that fail when run in parallel. (This may have nothing to do with
FreeBSD and may just mean that the hosts are resource-constrained.) Move
this test to sequential as we have done with several other
timer-dependent tests recently.

The test has also been refactored and documented via comments.

PR-URL: nodejs#9487
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <[email protected]>
addaleax pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2016
@Trott @addaleax
test: move timer-dependent test to sequential
2a96256
`test-regress-GH-897` is dependent on a timer firing within a period of
time. Especially on some of the FreeBSD hosts on CI, we have seen tests
like that fail when run in parallel. (This may have nothing to do with
FreeBSD and may just mean that the hosts are resource-constrained.) Move
this test to sequential as we have done with several other
timer-dependent tests recently.

The test has also been refactored and documented via comments.

PR-URL: #9487
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <[email protected]>
addaleax pushed a commit to addaleax/node that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2016
@Trott @addaleax
test: move timer-dependent test to sequential
9808985
`test-regress-nodejsGH-897` is dependent on a timer firing within a period of
time. Especially on some of the FreeBSD hosts on CI, we have seen tests
like that fail when run in parallel. (This may have nothing to do with
FreeBSD and may just mean that the hosts are resource-constrained.) Move
this test to sequential as we have done with several other
timer-dependent tests recently.

The test has also been refactored and documented via comments.

PR-URL: nodejs#9487
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2016
@Trott @MylesBorins
test: move timer-dependent test to sequential
b2b2bc2
`test-regress-GH-897` is dependent on a timer firing within a period of
time. Especially on some of the FreeBSD hosts on CI, we have seen tests
like that fail when run in parallel. (This may have nothing to do with
FreeBSD and may just mean that the hosts are resource-constrained.) Move
this test to sequential as we have done with several other
timer-dependent tests recently.

The test has also been refactored and documented via comments.

PR-URL: #9487
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
@Trott @MylesBorins
test: move timer-dependent test to sequential
839b652
`test-regress-GH-897` is dependent on a timer firing within a period of
time. Especially on some of the FreeBSD hosts on CI, we have seen tests
like that fail when run in parallel. (This may have nothing to do with
FreeBSD and may just mean that the hosts are resource-constrained.) Move
this test to sequential as we have done with several other
timer-dependent tests recently.

The test has also been refactored and documented via comments.

PR-URL: #9487
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
@Trott @MylesBorins
test: move timer-dependent test to sequential
ec65984
`test-regress-GH-897` is dependent on a timer firing within a period of
time. Especially on some of the FreeBSD hosts on CI, we have seen tests
like that fail when run in parallel. (This may have nothing to do with
FreeBSD and may just mean that the hosts are resource-constrained.) Move
this test to sequential as we have done with several other
timer-dependent tests recently.

The test has also been refactored and documented via comments.

PR-URL: #9487
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Minwoo Jung <[email protected]>
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2017
@Trott
test: fix flaky test-regress-nodejsGH-897
65d0489
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

Fixes: nodejs#10073
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2017
@Trott
test: fix flaky test-regress-nodejsGH-897
80c72c6
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

PR-URL: nodejs#10903
Fixes: nodejs#10073
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
@Trott Trott mentioned this pull request Jan 23, 2017
test: enhance test-timers #10960
Closed
3 tasks done
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2017
@Trott
test: enhance test-timers
2323569
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-nodejsGH-897.
italoacasas pushed a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Jan 25, 2017
@Trott Italo A. Casas
test: fix flaky test-regress-nodejsGH-897
09f2831
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

PR-URL: nodejs#10903
Fixes: nodejs#10073
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
@italoacasas italoacasas mentioned this pull request Jan 25, 2017
Proposal to update v7.x-staging #10989
Closed
Trott added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2017
@Trott
test: enhance test-timers
997af07
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-GH-897.

PR-URL: #10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
italoacasas pushed a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2017
@Trott Italo A. Casas
test: fix flaky test-regress-nodejsGH-897
3ce9681
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

PR-URL: nodejs#10903
Fixes: nodejs#10073
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 28, 2017
@Trott @targos
test: enhance test-timers
844cb0f
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-GH-897.

PR-URL: #10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
@italoacasas italoacasas mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2017
v7.5.0 proposal #11062
Merged
italoacasas pushed a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2017
@Trott Italo A. Casas
test: fix flaky test-regress-nodejsGH-897
9d5170f
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

PR-URL: nodejs#10903
Fixes: nodejs#10073
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
italoacasas pushed a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2017
@Trott Italo A. Casas
test: enhance test-timers
fa8baa2
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-nodejsGH-897.

PR-URL: nodejs#10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
italoacasas pushed a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2017
@Trott Italo A. Casas
test: fix flaky test-regress-nodejsGH-897
1b8c238
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

PR-URL: nodejs#10903
Fixes: nodejs#10073
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
italoacasas pushed a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2017
@Trott Italo A. Casas
test: enhance test-timers
e6a7d59
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-nodejsGH-897.

PR-URL: nodejs#10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2017
@Trott @MylesBorins
test: fix flaky test-regress-GH-897
8ecd878
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-GH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

PR-URL: #10903
Fixes: #10073
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2017
@Trott @jasnell
test: enhance test-timers
f866bac
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-GH-897.

PR-URL: #10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2017
@Trott @jasnell
test: enhance test-timers
6e25ea5
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-GH-897.

PR-URL: #10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 9, 2017
@Trott @MylesBorins
test: fix flaky test-regress-GH-897
e59697c
Even after being moved to `sequential` in
1ce05ad, `test-regress-GH-897` still
was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.

The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing
node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.

On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.

This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to
run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.

PR-URL: #10903
Fixes: #10073
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 9, 2017
@Trott @MylesBorins
test: enhance test-timers
d9362ef
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-GH-897.

PR-URL: #10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Mar 9, 2017
v6.10.1 proposal #11759
Merged
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 9, 2017
@Trott @MylesBorins
test: enhance test-timers
3f6a2db
In test-timers, confirm that all input values that should be coerced to
1 ms are not being coerced to a significantly larger value.

This eliminates the need for the separate test-regress-GH-897.

PR-URL: #10960
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
@snyk-bot snyk-bot mentioned this pull request Jan 31, 2022
[Snyk] Security upgrade shelljs from 0.7.8 to 0.8.5 enterstudio/node#26
Open
@aliscco aliscco mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2023
[Snyk] Fix for 30 vulnerabilities aliscco/alisco-node#279
Open
@aliscco aliscco mentioned this pull request Jun 21, 2023
[Snyk] Security upgrade @commitlint/cli from 8.2.0 to 8.3.6 aliscco/alisco-node#488
Open
This was referenced Jul 8, 2023
[Snyk] Security upgrade babel-loader from 8.3.0 to 9.1.3 aliscco/alisco-node#625
Open
[Snyk] Security upgrade babel-loader from 8.3.0 to 9.1.3 aliscco/alisco-node#626
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

3 participants

@cjihrig @evanlucas @brendanashworth
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
You are visitor 01402503 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.