[Pulp-dev] 500 error during logrotate

Brian Bouterse bbouters at redhat.com
Wed Jan 31 16:25:53 UTC 2018


I think it's very likely that your 500 errors (BZ1512426) during logrotate
are the same root cause as BZ1516481.

The fix itself is in gofer. To receive the fix for this you'll need to
upgrade gofer 2.11.1-1. You can see more info about that here [0], along
with its srpm if you need to rebuild it.

[0]: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3129#note-33

-Brian

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 2:34 PM, Jonathon Turel <jturel at redhat.com> wrote:

> Ping :)
>
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Jonathon Turel <jturel at redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Sorry for the delay - have been focusing on 6.3 issues..
> >
> > Anyway, I was not able to reproduce the problem and get my own stack
> > trace. However, I see that there is one already attached in the BZ:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1351468
> >
> > It doesn't perfectly match what's in the issue you sent me but it
> > seems like the repro steps are basically the same. I think those
> > having a similar root cause is likely. Do you agree, and if so what's
> > the next step?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jonathon
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:36 PM, David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >> Jonathon,
> >>
> >> I believe your issue is the same as:
> >>
> >> https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3129
> >>
> >> This also came up during log rotations in apache/httpd. Any way you can
> get
> >> the stacktrace to confirm?
> >>
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Jonathon Turel <jturel at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi team,
> >>>
> >>> I'd like some input on this bug:
> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512426
> >>>
> >>> The httpd error log there shows what is wrong. I would have expected
> >>> the request to indeed be handled gracefully but that doesn't seem to
> >>> be the case.
> >>>
> >>> Interestingly, I wasn't able to reproduce the problem with a different
> >>> API: /pulp/api/v2/users/ so maybe this problem is somehow specific to
> >>> publishing a repo with a distributor ID.
> >>>
> >>> We're thinking of putting some across-the-board retry logic into
> >>> runcible to get around this, but obviously that isn't preferred. This
> >>> feels like a WSGI or Pulp problem.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for taking a look & let me know if I can provide more details.
> >>>
> >>> Jonathon
> >>>
> >>> (let me know if there's a better list for this discussion)
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Pulp-dev mailing list
> >>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
> >>
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20180131/ce25956c/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list