Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve visibility of "Scaling and load testing" information in DOMjudge documentation #2276

Open
taoky opened this issue Dec 6, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2424
Open

Improve visibility of "Scaling and load testing" information in DOMjudge documentation #2276

taoky opened this issue Dec 6, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2424

Comments

@taoky
Copy link

taoky commented Dec 6, 2023

Description of the problem

DOMjudge repo wiki Scaling and load testing contains important information for large contest configuration (including setting max_children value). However, this is not highlighted in DOMjudge manual. Though it gives a link to wiki in doc/manual/overview.rst, it could be neglected very easily -- As far as I know, some server admins for ICPC Asia Regional Contest have reported that they are unaware of this resource.

Your environment

  • main branch of DOMjudge/domjudge

Steps to reproduce

  1. View domserver installation and checklist pages:

Expected behaviour

max_children setting (or "Scaling and load testing" wiki page) should be mentioned in relevant sections of the manual.

Actual behaviour

There is no clear mention or guidance on these critical settings for configuring large-scale contests within the main DOMjudge manual.

Any other information that you want to share?

N/A

vmcj added a commit to vmcj/domjudge that referenced this issue Mar 24, 2024
@vmcj vmcj linked a pull request Mar 24, 2024 that will close this issue
vmcj added a commit to vmcj/domjudge that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants