Pelita Game Add Long Timeout For Enhanced Player Reliability

Hey everyone! Let's dive into a crucial discussion about improving the reliability of our Pelita game by implementing a timeout mechanism for players. This enhancement will address the issue of lingering processes and ensure a cleaner, more stable gaming experience. Let's explore the details!

The Problem: Lingering Pelita Player Processes

Sometimes, during testing or due to unforeseen circumstances, our Pelita game can leave behind orphaned player processes. This isn't a frequent occurrence, but when it does happen, it can lead to a buildup of inactive clients running in the background. Imagine having 20 or more Pelita clients hogging resources – not ideal, right? Our existing cleanup routines are generally effective, but this change adds an extra layer of protection.

The core issue revolves around the while–recv loop within a Pelita player. This loop is responsible for waiting for new set_move requests from the Pelita main game process. If, for some reason, a request never arrives (e.g., the game is paused indefinitely, or the main process crashes), the player process can become stuck in this loop, consuming resources without doing anything. This situation, while rare, can accumulate over time, particularly during development and testing phases where games might be abruptly terminated or paused for extended periods. These orphaned processes not only waste resources but can also complicate debugging efforts and potentially impact the overall stability of the system. For example, if a developer runs multiple test sessions without properly cleaning up, the accumulation of these processes could eventually lead to performance degradation or even system crashes. Therefore, addressing this issue is crucial for maintaining a robust and reliable Pelita gaming environment.

The Solution: Implementing a Timeout

To tackle this, we propose adding a timeout to the while–recv loop. Essentially, we'll set a limit on how long a Pelita player will wait for a new set_move request. If no request is received within this timeframe, the player process will gracefully exit, freeing up resources and preventing it from becoming a zombie process.

We're suggesting a timeout of around 60 minutes. This means a client will wait at most 60 minutes for a new move request from the Pelita main process before giving up and exiting. This timeframe strikes a balance between allowing for reasonable pauses in gameplay and preventing processes from lingering indefinitely. Sixty minutes should be sufficient for most scenarios, while still ensuring that orphaned processes are eventually cleaned up. This timeout mechanism operates by initiating a timer each time the while–recv loop starts waiting for a new request. If the timer reaches 60 minutes without a new request being received, an exit signal is triggered within the player process. This signal initiates a shutdown sequence, allowing the process to release its resources and terminate cleanly. The implementation of this timeout mechanism involves modifying the code within the Pelita player process responsible for handling incoming requests. This includes setting up the timer, checking for timeout conditions, and initiating the exit sequence when the timeout occurs. Proper error handling and logging are also essential components of this implementation to ensure that any timeout events are recorded and can be investigated if needed. The goal is to create a system that is both efficient and transparent, allowing for the easy identification and resolution of any timeout-related issues.

Implications and Considerations

This change has a few important implications we need to consider:

• Pausing Games: If a game is paused in the UI for longer than 60 minutes, it will effectively be canceled. One of the players will be considered to have resigned and lost the game.
• Heartbeat Messages (Future Enhancement): We could potentially mitigate this by having the UI send periodic "heartbeat" messages to the Pelita player. This would signal that the game is still active and prevent the timeout from triggering. We could also reduce the normal waiting time to a few minutes if we implement heartbeats. However, we're intentionally keeping this out of the scope for the initial implementation to keep things focused.
• Transparency: This issue is being addressed with transparency. While the actual code implementation will occur in #890, creating a separate issue here ensures that everyone is aware of the rationale and potential impact of this change. This open approach encourages discussion and allows for feedback from all stakeholders.

The impact of this timeout on users should be minimal under normal circumstances. The 60-minute window is long enough to accommodate most short breaks or interruptions during gameplay. However, it is important to communicate this change to users, especially those who may frequently pause games for extended periods. Providing clear information about the timeout and its implications can help manage user expectations and prevent frustration. Additionally, if the heartbeat mechanism is implemented in the future, users could be given the option to extend the timeout period or disable it altogether for specific scenarios. This level of control would further enhance the user experience and ensure that the timeout mechanism serves its intended purpose without being overly disruptive. For developers and testers, this change provides a more predictable and stable environment. By preventing the accumulation of orphaned processes, it simplifies debugging and reduces the risk of performance issues. This leads to a more efficient development workflow and allows for faster iteration on new features and improvements.

Why This Matters

Implementing this timeout is a proactive step towards ensuring the long-term stability and reliability of our Pelita game. It's about preventing potential issues before they become major problems. By gracefully handling orphaned processes, we can maintain a cleaner system, reduce resource consumption, and improve the overall gaming experience.

Moreover, the addition of a timeout mechanism represents a move towards greater robustness in the Pelita system. By proactively addressing the potential for orphaned processes, we are strengthening the system's ability to handle unexpected events and maintain consistent performance over time. This is particularly important as the game evolves and new features are added. A stable and reliable foundation is essential for supporting future development efforts and ensuring that players have a positive experience. In addition to the practical benefits, this change also reflects a commitment to quality and maintainability. By addressing potential issues early on, we are reducing the technical debt associated with the project and making it easier to manage and maintain in the long run. This is crucial for ensuring the long-term sustainability of the project and minimizing the risk of future problems. The focus on proactive problem-solving demonstrates a mature approach to software development and sets a positive precedent for future work.

Next Steps

The implementation of this timeout will be carried out in #890. We'll be sure to keep you updated on the progress. In the meantime, your feedback and thoughts on this proposal are highly valued! Let's discuss any concerns or suggestions you might have.

So, the next steps involve the actual coding and testing of the timeout mechanism within the Pelita player process. This will involve modifying the while–recv loop to incorporate a timer and exit condition. The code will need to be thoroughly tested to ensure that the timeout functions correctly and does not introduce any unintended side effects. This testing will include scenarios where the game is paused for extended periods, where the main process crashes, and where network connectivity is interrupted. The goal is to ensure that the timeout mechanism behaves predictably and reliably under a variety of conditions. In addition to code changes, documentation will also need to be updated to reflect the new timeout behavior. This will include documenting the timeout period, its implications for users, and any configuration options that may be available. Clear and accurate documentation is essential for ensuring that developers and testers understand how the timeout mechanism works and how to use it effectively. Finally, the implementation of the timeout mechanism will be closely monitored after deployment to ensure that it is achieving its intended goals and not causing any unexpected issues. This monitoring will involve tracking the number of timeout events, analyzing system logs, and gathering feedback from users. This iterative approach allows for continuous improvement and ensures that the timeout mechanism remains effective over time.

Thanks, guys, for your time, and let's make Pelita even better!