On 10/27/2017 06:33 AM, Donald Hunter (donaldh) wrote: > I pushed this patch but the Jenkins builds have been running for 3+ hours. It > built fine locally. > > > > I don’t seem to have permission to kill the Jenkins jobs.
yeah, this one in particular: https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/job/unimgr-verify-oxygen-mvn33-openjdk8/10/console (the other two verify jobs are fine.) It's hung in SFT. I can abort it, but I think our default timeout is 6h and it's currently at 5:45. Let's let it go and see if we can get lucky with some extra logs when jenkins aborts it. JamO > https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/64799/ > > > > Cheers, > > Donald. > > > > *From: *"Tomas Cere -X (tcere - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco)" > <[email protected]> > *Date: *Friday, 27 October 2017 at 10:47 > *To: *"Donald Hunter (donaldh)" <[email protected]>, Michael Vorburger > <[email protected]> > *Cc: *"Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco)" > <[email protected]>, controller-dev > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, Tom > Pantelis <[email protected]> > *Subject: *RE: [unimgr-dev] [controller-dev] SingleFeatureTest (SFT) failure > on odl-integration-compatible-with-all due to > ConflictingModificationAppliedException: Node was created by other > transaction. > > > > https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/64797 > > > > Removes the cfg subsystem loopback, you should still migrate towards one of > the topology features as the connector features > were used > > for connectors configured via cfg subsystem. They were migrated towards the > datastore purely for backwards compatibility in > case we finaly > > get rid of cfg subsystem. Without the above patch odl-netconf-connector-ssh > is the same as odl-netconf-topology, only that > the cfg subsystem > > mount is preconfigured so you should have no issues migrating. > > > > Tomas > > > > *From:* Donald Hunter (donaldh) > *Sent:* Thursday, October 26, 2017 18:18 > *To:* Michael Vorburger <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) > <[email protected]>; Tomas Cere -X (tcere - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected]>; controller-dev > <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; Tom Pantelis <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [unimgr-dev] [controller-dev] SingleFeatureTest (SFT) failure > on odl-integration-compatible-with-all due to > ConflictingModificationAppliedException: Node was created by other > transaction. > > > > Hi, > > > > Well it’s easy enough for me to change features.xml to only reference > odl-netconf-topology. I will verify a change just now. > > > > We use netconf southbound and expect devices to be mounted. If that no longer > requires odl-netconf-connector or > odl-netconf-connector-ssh to be included then there should be no fallout. > > > > This points to a bigger problem where breaking changes sometimes happen > upstream and the first that unimgr hears about it is > when someone either throws us out of the release build or threatens to do so. > > > > Cheers, > > Donald. > > > > *From: *Michael Vorburger <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Date: *Thursday, 26 October 2017 at 14:38 > *To: *"Donald Hunter (donaldh)" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Cc: *"Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco)" > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, "Tomas > Cere -X (tcere - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco)" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>, controller-dev > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>, > "[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>" > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>, > Tom Pantelis <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Subject: *Re: [unimgr-dev] [controller-dev] SingleFeatureTest (SFT) failure > on odl-integration-compatible-with-all due to > ConflictingModificationAppliedException: Node was created by other > transaction. > > > > Hi Donald, > > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Donald Hunter (donaldh) <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > > > Please don’t just remove unimgr. That’s not helpful to unimgr. The first > I heard there was a problem relating to unimgr > was yesterday when I read your email after you forwarded it to the > unimgr-dev list. > > > > What’s the problem that you think is caused by unimgr and I’ll see if we > can resolve it. > > > I've no idea actually - but only based on > https://jira.opendaylight.org/browse/NETCONF-479, my understanding is that > Tomas > Cere and Vratko Polak understand this better. > > > > My main point really is that, whatever needs to be done in unimgr and/or > netconf (which personally I unforatuntely don't have > the cycles to help out more with), is not an excuse to keep failing > distribution build jobs for many, many other projects... > I'd there again like to propose to TEMPORARILY (!) remove unimgr from > distribution, until this is solved - what's the harm? > > > > Cheers, > > Donald. > > > > *From: *<[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of > Michael Vorburger <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Date: *Thursday, 26 October 2017 at 12:44 > *To: *"Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco)" > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, "Tomas > Cere -X (tcere - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco)" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Cc: *controller-dev <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>, > "[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>, Tom Pantelis > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Subject: *Re: [unimgr-dev] [controller-dev] SingleFeatureTest (SFT) > failure on odl-integration-compatible-with-all due > to ConflictingModificationAppliedException: Node was created by other > transaction. > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:44 PM, Michael Vorburger <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > +unimgr-dev: > > > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Previous story: [2]. > > > > It's not that rare - just hit me again (on > https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/64674/), had to override once more > - and find this annoying.. > > > > > who would have to do what > > > > Ideally, Netconf developers would unify their features, > > which does not seem to get done anytime soon [3]. > > > If I understand [3] correctly, Tomas Cere doesn't even consider this > a netconf issue, but asks for "unimgr should > move towards odl-netconf-topology" (instead of > odl-netconf-connector-ssh, because "There is no reason to pull in > odl-netconf-connector-ssh unless you are using config subsystem > still"). Is this something the unimgr project would > be willing to do? > > > > If not, or if unimgr-dev, assuming I understand things correctly, why > don't we just kick unimgr project out of > distribution?! I'll raise a patch proposing this when it next hits > me, if it's not resolved by then. > > > > this just happened AGAIN on > https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/job/genius-distribution-check-oxygen/481/console > for https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/60303/ ... it's a real PITA > IMHO! > > > > I'd therefore like to suggest > https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/64761/ - objections, anyone? > > > > There is a workaround in Int/Dist [4] prepared, > > but it keeps SFT unstable, this time due to > > (lack of) Karaf 4 memory efficiency [5]. > > > > Current road to stability seem to be > > fixing various ODL project features (like [6]) > > to be less taxing on Karaf 4 bundle resolver, > > and then merging [4]. > > > > > It would be nice if the exception included some context like > the path. > > > > I have rebased my old [7]. > > In this case, it is multiple netconf features trying to update > > operational topology status for "controller-config" device. > > > > > How does SFT even pick this up to fail the test? > > > > In general, a "caused by" thrown by > featuresService.installFeature. > > In this case there was an ISE (visible in surefire report [8] > > at 12:27:25,742) coming from here [9] (at least in Nitrogen), > > not sure which component gets to throw it. > > > > Vratko. > > > > [2] > https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/release/2017-October/012728.html > > [3] https://jira.opendaylight.org/browse/NETCONF-479 > > [4] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/64410 > > [5] https://jira.opendaylight.org/browse/ODLPARENT-125 > > [6] https://jira.opendaylight.org/browse/INTDIST-92 > > [7] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/48118 > > [8] > > https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/jenkins092/infrautils-distribution-check-oxygen/144/distribution/features/singles/odl-integration-compatible-with-all/target/surefire-reports/org.opendaylight.odlparent.featuretest.SingleFeatureTest-output.txt.gz > > [9] > > https://github.com/opendaylight/netconf/blob/release/nitrogen/netconf/sal-netconf-connector/src/main/java/org/opendaylight/netconf/sal/connect/netconf/sal/NetconfDeviceTopologyAdapter.java#L243 > > > > *From:* [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Tom Pantelis > *Sent:* 23 October, 2017 15:24 > *To:* Michael Vorburger <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Cc:* controller-dev <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > *Subject:* Re: [controller-dev] SingleFeatureTest (SFT) failure > on odl-integration-compatible-with-all due to > ConflictingModificationAppliedException: Node was created by > other transaction. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Michael Vorburger > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Any idea who would have to do what to precent SFT from (only > occassionally?!) failing > on odl-integration-compatible-with-all due to > ConflictingModificationAppliedException: Node was created by > other transaction, as seen > on > https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/jenkins092/infrautils-distribution-check-oxygen/144/console.log.gz > for https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/63466/ ? > > > > It would be nice if the exception included some context like the > path. Does this test install all netconf > features? I've seen such sporadic issues with the callhome > feature when it's installed with all the other netconf > features. > > > > How does SFT even pick this up to fail the test? Log scraping? > Or was it a "caused by" thrown on blueprint startup? > > > > > Tx, > > M. > > -- > > Michael Vorburger, Red Hat > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | IRC: > vorburger @freenode | ~ = http://vorburger.ch > <http://vorburger.ch/> > > > _______________________________________________ > controller-dev mailing list > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/controller-dev > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > controller-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/controller-dev > _______________________________________________ controller-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/controller-dev
