Skip to content

Conversation

@knopers8
Copy link
Collaborator

This allows to disable all DomainInfoHeader propagation with a corresponding DataProcessorLabel. It addresses the issue reported in QC-1320, where remote QC workflows were getting flooded with a DIH for each QC task instance in the setup.

This allows to disable all DomainInfoHeader propagation with a corresponding DataProcessorLabel.
It addresses the issue reported in QC-1320, where remote QC workflows were getting flooded with a DIH for each QC task instance in the setup.
@knopers8 knopers8 requested a review from a team as a code owner December 16, 2025 15:51
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION RELEASES:
To request your PR to be included in production software, please add the corresponding labels called "async-" to your PR. Add the labels directly (if you have the permissions) or add a comment of the form (note that labels are separated by a ",")

+async-label <label1>, <label2>, !<label3> ...

This will add <label1> and <label2> and removes <label3>.

The following labels are available
async-2023-pbpb-apass4
async-2023-pp-apass4
async-2024-pp-apass1
async-2022-pp-apass7
async-2024-pp-cpass0
async-2024-PbPb-apass1
async-2024-ppRef-apass1
async-2024-PbPb-apass2
async-2023-PbPb-apass5

@knopers8
Copy link
Collaborator Author

knopers8 commented Jan 7, 2026

@ktf could you have a look please?

@ktf
Copy link
Member

ktf commented Jan 7, 2026

How about using it to scale the oldest possible timeframe, rather than completely disable it? I worry that by just disabling it, things could accidentally accumulate.

@knopers8
Copy link
Collaborator Author

knopers8 commented Jan 7, 2026

How about using it to scale the oldest possible timeframe, rather than completely disable it? I worry that by just disabling it, things could accidentally accumulate.

Hmm, assuming that timeslices are a consecutive sequence, this could be done. However, we would have to automatically tune the scaling factor to accordingly to the number of EPNs, which is doable I guess, just more plumbing to do.

This being said, in the case of QC, I don't expect things to accumulate due to poor synchronization. If that happens, maybe it's better that things breaks and we see it, rather than it going unnoticed... I am open for counterarguments though.

@ktf
Copy link
Member

ktf commented Jan 7, 2026

Ok, let's start with this and then we see.

@ktf ktf merged commit 91a991f into AliceO2Group:dev Jan 7, 2026
12 checks passed
@knopers8 knopers8 deleted the optionally-suppress-dih branch January 7, 2026 10:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants