Open MohammadMahdiJavid opened 9 months ago
So from a quick search around I can see the profile.tar getting generated here: https://github.com/openwpm/OpenWPM/blob/f72e7ca1fc3edcc60b26c780c264176e1e384779/openwpm/browser_manager.py#L114-L134 Which then get used here: https://github.com/openwpm/OpenWPM/blob/f72e7ca1fc3edcc60b26c780c264176e1e384779/openwpm/deploy_browsers/deploy_firefox.py#L64-L73
And never cleaned up. Since the recovery_tar is by definition generated by OpenWPM, it should clean up after the browser has been restored after a crash. Doing an os.remove
and unsetting browser_params.recovery_tar
after it has been restored seems reasonable.
Do you have time to implement this?
Hi, Thanks for your time and the great insight provided
I see here that tempdir get's removed, although the variable name looks very unreadable :) and tempdir is the one used to create the directory
I think the issue would be from the profiling since it get's removed when spawn is successful and by looking more into the logs I realized
there are different errors like
File "openwpm/commands/profile_commands.py", line 58, in dump_profile
tar.add(browser_profile_path, arcname="")
File "python3.9/tarfile.py", line 2172, in add
self.add(os.path.join(name, f), os.path.join(arcname, f),
File "python3.9/tarfile.py", line 2150, in add
tarinfo = self.gettarinfo(name, arcname)
File "python3.9/tarfile.py", line 2023, in gettarinfo
statres = os.lstat(name)
FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/tmp/firefox_profile_mp57p7k5/prefs-41.js'
or similar errors for other files like
prefs-41.js
storage.sqlite-journal
WebDriverBiDiServer.json
I was wondering when the profile is being dumped, if the previous browser is crashed and closed, right? does it need a few seconds maybe to remove temp files or something like this?
i think this should be the issue of "not removed archived profiles"
Hi,
i'm running large crawls, but as i noticed temp files are not getting removed as sometime passes or crawls move forward
openwpm_profilearchive{some random number} --> each almost more than 2GB
i was wondering, if i made mistake in my experiments or this feature is not implemented?
Thanks