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

feat: add solvelimit to config.yaml, matching timeout value #105

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cstenico
Copy link

This PR introduces the ability to set the solvelimit parameter in config.yaml for VROOM-Express. The proposed value matches the default VROOM timeout, allowing the time limit to be configured globally instead of being specified in each request.

Changes:

  • Added solvelimit parameter to config.yaml.
  • The value of solvelimit is set to match the default VROOM timeout.

Benefits:

  • Streamlines configuration by enabling users to set the time limit once in config.yaml.
  • Eliminates the need to include the time limit option in each request to VROOM.
  • Ensures consistent behavior with VROOM's default timeout settings.

Copy link
Contributor

@jcoupey jcoupey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR, I can definitely see that this may be useful. Only concern here is that there is actually no default value for -l when using vroom on the command-line, so we'd go from no limit down to 300 seconds by default.

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ cliArgs:
planmode: false # run vroom in plan mode (-c) if set to true
threads: 4 # number of threads to use (-t)
explore: 5 # exploration level to use (0..5) (-x)
solvelimit: 300 # stop solving process after 'limit' seconds (-l)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will change behavior as the default for -l on the command-line is no limit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants