Re: [rt-users] Testing 4.0.0rc5 - experiences upgrading from 3.6.4 on RHEL6
On 2011/3/4, at 上午 3:13, Darren Nickerson wrote: On Mar 2, 2011, at 10:19 AM, Chia-liang Kao wrote: It seems the issue is with apache2 and plack. i can reproduce the stalled connection (however not always) with the plack-req.psgi example from the plack dist, with apache 2.2.16 on ubuntu maverick. however it's a bit different from yours. You're definitely looking at a different problem. Is there any way I can make the database connections non-persistent? That might help the ones that are getting confused. Try to remove the Plack::Handler::Apache2-preload line and make MaxRequestsPerChild 1 ?
Re: [rt-users] Testing 4.0.0rc5 - experiences upgrading from 3.6.4 on RHEL6
Darren,
On Feb 24, 2011, at 7:04 PM, Darren Nickerson wrote:
That FD is a network connection to our database server:
[root@rt4 Plack-0.9970]# ls -l /proc/30310/fd/1
lrwx--. 1 root root 64 Feb 24 17:44 /proc/30310/fd/1 - socket:
[281592]
[root@rt4 Plack-0.9970]# netstat -antep | grep 281592
tcp0 5 10.0.12.149:49410
10.0.11.100:3306ESTABLISHED 48 281592 30310/
httpd
The database server has no record of that tcp connection any
longer, and mysqladmin processlist shows all threads sleeping.
*bump* any thoughts on this?
Should I be looking outiside of RT for a fix for this? Is this more
likely to be a kernel/networking problem in RHEL6 or with mod_perl
or the MySQL DBD/DBI stuff? Looks like RT is using persistent
database connections, but that when the lockup occurs it's usually
because apache is waiting to get data back from a MySQL socket that
no longer exists on the database server ...
It seems the issue is with apache2 and plack. i can reproduce the
stalled connection (however not always) with the
plack-req.psgi example from the plack dist, with apache 2.2.16 on
ubuntu maverick. however it's a bit different from yours.
strace says:
close(0)= 0
read(5, 0x7f1f67af, 1) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource
temporarily unavailable)
accept(4, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(64924),
sin_addr=inet_addr(114.44.215.78)}, [16]) = 0
fcntl(0, F_GETFD) = 0
fcntl(0, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
getsockname(0, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(6254),
sin_addr=inet_addr(10.130.158.43)}, [16]) = 0
fcntl(0, F_GETFL) = 0x2 (flags O_RDWR)
fcntl(0, F_SETFL, O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK)= 0
read(0, 0x7f8e98b0bf58, 8000) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource
temporarily unavailable)
poll([{fd=0, events=POLLIN}], 1, 30
Cheers,
CLK
Re: [rt-users] Testing 4.0.0rc5 - experiences upgrading from 3.6.4 on RHEL6
Darren, I am looking at the hung response issue. for the Location error you are getting, please update the apache config to use Location / ... /Location instead of Directory /opt/rt4/share/html. I've only been able to reproduce the hung issue when setting the apache to have only one worker, and when the response finally came out, i see the login page's time to display being something normal, like 0.09 secs, so that means the congestion happened in apache or the modperl glue somehow. In your case, does the page eventually came out rendered at all, like after 5min? and can you see if it makes any difference if you change around line 222 of RT::Interface::Web::Handler from: my $h = RT::Interface::Web::Handler::NewHandler( 'HTML::Mason::PSGIHandler::Streamy'); to: my $h = RT::Interface::Web::Handler::NewHandler( 'HTML::Mason::PSGIHandler');
Re: [rt-users] rt-mailgate not working
Simon Gao simon.gao at schrodinger.com writes: What caused this error?Is using secure http required for rt-mailgate to work? Simon, Please install the version of Plack and it should be fixed: http://search.cpan.org/~miyagawa/Plack-0.9970/ (0.9971 is broken and being fixed, don't use it!) Cheers, CLK
Re: [rt-users] Please help with rt-3.9.6
Hi, Odhiambo Washington odhiambo at gmail.com writes: [error] [client 192.168.40.79] Mandatory parameter 'ah' missing in call to RT::Interface::Web::Request-new()\n\t...propagated at This seems to be caused by webmux-based modperl handlers being loaded to the same apache instance. Do you have other vhost configuring rt using the old config? We'll remove all the webmux-based handlers in the next devel release. Cheers, CLK
Re: [rt-users] RTx::WorkflowBuilder - Can't call method HasUnresolvedDependencies on an undefined value
在 2009/2/27 下午 5:18 時， Richard Foley 寫到： On Friday 27 February 2009 04:40:54 Chia-liang Kao wrote: appears to be succesful. However, when I resolve the (still hidden) approval, I see the following error: System error error: Can't call method HasUnresolvedDependencies on an undefined value at /opt/rt3/bin/../local/lib/RT/Approval/Rule/Passed.pm line 35. context: Is this a single-stage or multi-stage approval? and is the test t/ approval/basic.t passing for you? This case was a multi-stage approval, the single-stage passed just fine. In fact one-, two-, and four-stage approvals were all fine too, it was just the three-stage approval which failed consistently in this manner. ok, so at which stage of resolving causes the issue? can you traverse the depends on link to see if it reaches to the one in question? If you look at the (hidden) approval ticket by putting the ticket id into Display.html, do you see DependedOnBy containing the actual ticket or other approvals? Well, there are three approval tickets, so it's not so simple to explain... What I did notice was that under the failing three-approval the Refers to: line appeared to have a missing checkbox, or an empty line, depending on what way you look at it. I've attached a screenshot to show what I mean, maybe this helps? I think those tickets are under refers to by: Cheers, CLK ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RTx::WorkflowBuilder - Can't call method HasUnresolvedDependencies on an undefined value
在 2009/2/27 下午 6:25 時， Richinud 寫到： On Friday 27 February 2009 10:45:46 Chia-liang Kao wrote: issue? Maybe I'll just stick to two-stage approvals - as they appear to work just fine ;-) The tests in RTx::WorkflowBuilder actually contains a 3-stage approval. can you try to modify the test's config to reproduce the problem? Cheers, CLK ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RTx::WorkflowBuilder - Can't call method HasUnresolvedDependencies on an undefined value
Hi Richard, It transpires the approval ticket is actually created, although I am unable to see it unless I look up the id directly, even though my user currently has every right imaginable. Further, when I reject the (hidden) approval, this appears to be succesful. However, when I resolve the (still hidden) approval, I see the following error: System error error: Can't call method HasUnresolvedDependencies on an undefined value at /opt/rt3/bin/../local/lib/RT/Approval/Rule/Passed.pm line 35. context: Is this a single-stage or multi-stage approval? and is the test t/ approval/basic.t passing for you? If you look at the (hidden) approval ticket by putting the ticket id into Display.html, do you see DependedOnBy containing the actual ticket or other approvals? Cheers, CLK ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Approval RT 3.8.2 system approver not specified
Hi Ton, correspondence is also saying that Nobody has approved the ticket (what looks silly in my opinion). you should in fact set the owner of the approval ticket in your template, so the owner is notified of the approval and can perform the approval action. I have a global scrip that set the owner when a ticket is resolved that currently unowned. This scrip however is running after inserting the above template correspondence (I also disabled it to test the current default approval behaviour). Is this a forgotten step in the approval system, not setting the owner for the approval ticket? Is it also not better to grab the actor’s name doing the approval instead of depending on the actual owner of the approval ticket? I think the system is designed to have the owner of approval predetermined. if you want to allow a group of people to approve the ticket, you can create multiple tickets in the CreateTicket template for each of the potential approvers. Cheers, CLK ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] RTx::WorkflowBuilder is now available on CPAN
Hi, RTx::WorkflowBuilder is a tool that helps you configure multi-stage approval workflow in rt. It is now available at http://search.cpan.org/dist/RTx-WorkflowBuilder/. examples can be found in the doc at http://search.cpan.org/dist/RTx-WorkflowBuilder/bin/rt-workflow Cheers, CLK ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Approvals in 3.8.2 ??? -availability- ???
It's currently at http://code.bestpractical.com/bps-public/RTx-WorkflowBuilder/ , documentation and release is on the way. On Friday 13 February 2009 15:10:38 Chia-liang Kao wrote: We are in the process of releasing a RT extension called WorkflowBuilder Any sign of this anywhere? I'm trying to avoid re-inventing the wheel here... -- Richard Foley Ciao - shorter than aufwiedersehen http://www.rfi.net/ ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Strange things with RT 3.8.2 Approval system
Hi,
L B bertignac at gmail.com writes:
##
## SCENARIO 1
##
Remarks at the end of this scenario:
- I think the other approvers should receive a notification that the
ticket has been approved by one of them : do I have to add the
MYPROJECT_APPROVERS as admincc of the queue ? If I do this, standard
scrip will be applied, should I remove some of them ?
see if it works if you add user2 to the cc of the approval scrip template for
user1, and vice versa for user1 in template for user2.
- The two emails are not exactly the same : one saying other approvals
may be pending, the other saying all of them are approved: how can I
send an email when the request is partially approved, and another
email once all the approvals are done ? For example, emails Approved
by USER1, Approved by USER2, Approved by all the approvers
In RT::Approval::Rule::Passed, the partially approved and all approved cases are
simply using different templates ('Approval Passed' and 'All Approvals Passed',
respectively). I don't think the workflow currently supporting sending both
types of mails in the last approval that triggers complete approval.
- There is a comment in the email content saying a summary of which
appears below. which is false. How can make it true ?
The section is the Content part in your template. you can use strings such as
{$Tickets{TOP}-Subject} to refer to the subject of the ticket to be approved
in the template.
##
## SCENARIO 2
##
- Why is the comment of the USER1 rejecting the ticket is missing ?
USER1 did a comment in the web interface but it doesn't appear neither
in the email nor in the web ticket log.
- IMO, it shouldn't be possible to approve a ticket once it has been
rejected by one of the approvers. Moreover, there is in the email Its
Owner may now start to act on it. which is not true.
Maybe these problems are related to my configuration, so is my
configuration correct ? Do I use the approval system how it's designed
to be used ?
I believe these are bugs. I can take a look later.
Cheers,
CLK
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Default query My Tickets
Hi Kenneth, Kenneth Crocker KFCrocker at lbl.gov writes: I need to make some changes to the default Query My Tickets. Where would I find that code to change some of the default sorts? Thanks. You can click edit on My Tickets, adjust the predefined search, and save it. Alternatively you can create a system-wide saved search, then go to Config - Global - RT at a glance to replace the default My Tickets with the search you just saved. Cheers, CLK ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Approvals status open-resolved
Richard Foley Richard.Foley at rfi.net writes: Hi all, I'm using RT 3.8.2 to set up approvals, and I'd like the approval process to set the ticket status to resolved, instead of open. I'm setting the status to pending inbetween times, and I'd like to get to resolved without RT ignoring me To which end I have fudged the code temporarily like this: Do you mean the status of the ticket pending approval? the code you changed is for setting the status for the approvals of next level to open. If you want to change the status of the top ticket, you want to do that in the if ($passed) section, and do SetStatus on $top. # /opt/rt3/lib/RT/Approval/Rule/Passed.pm:line 80: # $obj-SetStatus( Status = 'open', Force = 1 ); $obj-SetStatus( Status = 'resolved', Force = 1 ); Only the ticket is still set to open! The target ticket is happily marked as rejected or open, but I'm unable to get it to choose resolved... I've also tried this with local/ with no more luck - anyone have a better idea, please? ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Approvals status open-resolved
Richard,
Richard Foley Richard.Foley at rfi.net writes:
Hi Chia-liang,
Ok, so now I've got this:
if ($passed) {
$top-SetStatus( Status = 'resolved', Force = 1 );
$self-RunScripAction('Notify Owner', 'Approval Ready for Owner',
TicketObj = $top);
}
the change seems to work for me. Here's the change to the test in
t/approval/basic.t that demostrates the original ticket got set to resolved upon
all approval passed:
http://fsck.com/~clkao/rt-approval-autoresolve.patch
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
