Skip to content

Document controller transform staleness threshold - #954

Open
nirwester wants to merge 1 commit into
ros-navigation:rollingfrom
nirwester:docs-controller-transform-staleness-threshold
Open

Document controller transform staleness threshold#954
nirwester wants to merge 1 commit into
ros-navigation:rollingfrom
nirwester:docs-controller-transform-staleness-threshold

Conversation

@nirwester

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Basic Info

Info Please fill out this column
Ticket(s) this addresses ros-navigation/navigation2#6320
Does this PR contain AI-generated software? No

Documents the new transform_staleness_threshold parameter in the controller server.

Signed-off-by: Marco Matteo Bassa <bassamarco91@gmail.com>

@SteveMacenski SteveMacenski left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Lets leave this open as we discuss next steps with your PR, which may include a utility and expanding the use of this param to other locales

ros__parameters:
controller_frequency: 20.0
costmap_update_timeout: 0.3
transform_staleness_threshold: 1.0

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
transform_staleness_threshold: 1.0
transform_staleness_threshold: 0.0

Please copy paste these to start off with, setting this to something that low is not a sane general default I don't think

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The default is 0, these are just suggestions/examples, right? It's the same default value as AMCL's transform_tolerance, so 1.0 or a tiny bit more is what I'd set this to unless dealing with a very laggy system. Why would we suggest to have no check? :)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think increasing this then, I think 1.0 would trip sometimes and be an annoying ghost in the system for users. How about 3.0?

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