9:09 a.m.
Hi,
see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
Michal
9:57 a.m.
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:09:55PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
Hi,
see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
Michal
Do you remember why do we have separate preserve and sensitive? Would it
be better to merge the two?
10:11 a.m.
On 10/01/2014 04:57 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:09:55PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>
> Michal
Do you remember why do we have separate preserve and sensitive? Would it
be better to merge the two?
It would require more refactoring to merge the two. We have a lot
of places where we rely on the domain->case_sensitive to be bool
and it may introduce a lot of bugs if we were not careful enough
when doing the merge.
The domain->case_preserve is only used in get*nam calls and only
when dealing with values that will be returned to caller. It
is much less invasive to have separate variable for these
few cases and leave the rest of SSSD untouched.
Michal
10:21 a.m.
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 05:11:56PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:57 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:09:55PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>
>>Michal
>
>Do you remember why do we have separate preserve and sensitive? Would it
>be better to merge the two?
>
It would require more refactoring to merge the two. We have a lot
of places where we rely on the domain->case_sensitive to be bool
and it may introduce a lot of bugs if we were not careful enough
when doing the merge.
The domain->case_preserve is only used in get*nam calls and only
when dealing with values that will be returned to caller. It
is much less invasive to have separate variable for these
few cases and leave the rest of SSSD untouched.
Michal
OK, thanks.
9:58 a.m.
On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
Hi,
see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
Michal
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
Patch fixes the problem.
ACK
10:33 a.m.
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>Hi,
>
>see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>
>Michal
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>sssd-devel mailing list
>sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
Patch fixes the problem. ACK
* master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
12:19 p.m.
On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>
> On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>
>> Michal
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sssd-devel mailing list
>> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
> Patch fixes the problem. ACK
* master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
in test-negcache test:
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
Nick
4:54 p.m.
On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>
>>On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>
>>>Michal
>>>
>>>
>>Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>
>* master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
in test-negcache test:
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
Nick
Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date installation of
debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
LS
3:42 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 12:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>>
>>>> Michal
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>>
>> * master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
>
> A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
> http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
>
> in test-negcache test:
>
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
>
> Nick
Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date installation of
debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
Yes, it was probably a non-reproducible "fluke", but it's worth being aware
of. I haven't seen it fail ever before.
Nick
6:09 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 10:42 AM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 10/02/2014 12:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>> On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>>>
>>>>> Michal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>>>
>>> * master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
>>
>> A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
>> http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
>>
>> in test-negcache test:
>>
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
>>
>>
>> Nick
> Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date
> installation of
> debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
Yes, it was probably a non-reproducible "fluke", but it's worth being
aware
of. I haven't seen it fail ever before.
Nick
It looks like the execution of the test slowed
down (was paused or whatever) and the negative cache expired.
Maybe the VM did not have enough resources from the host and
slowed down execution. Or some other random strangeness.
Michal
6:59 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 02:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 10/02/2014 10:42 AM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> On 10/02/2014 12:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>> On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michal
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>>>>
>>>> * master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
>>>
>>> A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
>>> http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
>>>
>>> in test-negcache test:
>>>
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
>>>
>>>
>>> Nick
>> Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date
>> installation of
>> debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
>
> Yes, it was probably a non-reproducible "fluke", but it's worth being
aware
> of. I haven't seen it fail ever before.
It looks like the execution of the test slowed
down (was paused or whatever) and the negative cache expired.
Maybe the VM did not have enough resources from the host and
slowed down execution. Or some other random strangeness.
Ah, thank you Michal. It then joins the dyndns test (and some other) in the
group of timing-dependent tests. We'll have to do something about these. The
VM environment load is not very predictable and it's better not to have
randomly-failing tests in CI for whatever reason. Can we somehow increase the
time window size for them, perhaps?
Thank you.
7:19 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 01:59 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 10/02/2014 02:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
> On 10/02/2014 10:42 AM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>> On 10/02/2014 12:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>> On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>> On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>>>>>
>>>>> * master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
>>>>
>>>> A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
>>>> http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
>>>>
>>>> in test-negcache test:
>>>>
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>> Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date
>>> installation of
>>> debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
>>
>> Yes, it was probably a non-reproducible "fluke", but it's worth
being
>> aware
>> of. I haven't seen it fail ever before.
>
> It looks like the execution of the test slowed
> down (was paused or whatever) and the negative cache expired.
> Maybe the VM did not have enough resources from the host and
> slowed down execution. Or some other random strangeness.
Ah, thank you Michal. It then joins the dyndns test (and some other) in the
group of timing-dependent tests. We'll have to do something about these.
The
VM environment load is not very predictable and it's better not to have
randomly-failing tests in CI for whatever reason. Can we somehow
increase the
time window size for them, perhaps?
Thank you.
Increasing the time window is possible. It is currently set to
one second in the tests. If it fails in the future again, we
can double it. But one second should be really a lot for what
it does so I would keep it as is for now.
Michal
7:56 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 03:19 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 10/02/2014 01:59 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> On 10/02/2014 02:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>> On 10/02/2014 10:42 AM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>> On 10/02/2014 12:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>> On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>>> On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michal
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
>>>>>
>>>>> A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
>>>>> http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
>>>>>
>>>>> in test-negcache test:
>>>>>
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nick
>>>> Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date
>>>> installation of
>>>> debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
>>>
>>> Yes, it was probably a non-reproducible "fluke", but it's worth
being
>>> aware
>>> of. I haven't seen it fail ever before.
>>
>> It looks like the execution of the test slowed
>> down (was paused or whatever) and the negative cache expired.
>> Maybe the VM did not have enough resources from the host and
>> slowed down execution. Or some other random strangeness.
>
> Ah, thank you Michal. It then joins the dyndns test (and some other) in the
> group of timing-dependent tests. We'll have to do something about these.
> The
> VM environment load is not very predictable and it's better not to have
> randomly-failing tests in CI for whatever reason. Can we somehow
> increase the
> time window size for them, perhaps?
Increasing the time window is possible. It is currently set to
one second in the tests. If it fails in the future again, we
can double it. But one second should be really a lot for what
it does so I would keep it as is for now.
Sure, let's see how it goes, thank you.
I see dyndns failures much more often, do you know if we can do anything about
that?
Nick
8:11 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 02:56 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 10/02/2014 03:19 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
> On 10/02/2014 01:59 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>> On 10/02/2014 02:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>> On 10/02/2014 10:42 AM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>> On 10/02/2014 12:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>> On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl
wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Michal
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
>>>>>> http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in test-negcache test:
>>>>>>
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/te...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nick
>>>>> Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date
>>>>> installation of
>>>>> debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it was probably a non-reproducible "fluke", but it's
worth being
>>>> aware
>>>> of. I haven't seen it fail ever before.
>>>
>>> It looks like the execution of the test slowed
>>> down (was paused or whatever) and the negative cache expired.
>>> Maybe the VM did not have enough resources from the host and
>>> slowed down execution. Or some other random strangeness.
>>
>> Ah, thank you Michal. It then joins the dyndns test (and some other)
>> in the
>> group of timing-dependent tests. We'll have to do something about these.
>> The
>> VM environment load is not very predictable and it's better not to have
>> randomly-failing tests in CI for whatever reason. Can we somehow
>> increase the
>> time window size for them, perhaps?
>
> Increasing the time window is possible. It is currently set to
> one second in the tests. If it fails in the future again, we
> can double it. But one second should be really a lot for what
> it does so I would keep it as is for now.
Sure, let's see how it goes, thank you.
I see dyndns failures much more often, do you know if we can do anything
about
that?
Nick
I do not know. Do you have some logs where I could see where the
dyndns tests failed?
Michal
3:32 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 04:11 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 10/02/2014 02:56 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> I see dyndns failures much more often, do you know if we can do anything
> about that?
I do not know. Do you have some logs where I could see where the
dyndns tests failed?
I don't have much in the current archives, but here are three failures:
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/0/83/rhel7/ci-build-coverage/dyndns-t...
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/0/92/fedora20/ci-build-coverage/dyndn...
http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/0/95/fedora_rawhide/ci-build-coverage...
What's interesting is that all three of these are with a coverage-instrumented
build. However, I'm not sure if the previous failures were only in coverage
builds as well.
Nick
8:25 a.m.
On (02/10/14 15:56), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 10/02/2014 03:19 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>On 10/02/2014 01:59 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>On 10/02/2014 02:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>On 10/02/2014 10:42 AM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>>On 10/02/2014 12:54 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>On (01/10/14 20:19), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>>>>On 10/01/2014 06:33 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>>>On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 10/01/2014 04:09 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>see attached simple patch that fixes ticket:
>>>>>>>>>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2453
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Michal
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Patch fixes the problem. ACK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>* master: f6e008fe677ffcf8781c1d5154544066ea7ca9d4
>>>>>>
>>>>>>A CI job for this commit has failed on Debian:
>>>>>>http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/summary.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>in test-negcache test:
>>>>>>http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/1/22/debian_testing/ci-build-debug/test-negcache.log
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nick
>>>>>Works for me without any problem on clean, minimal, up to date
>>>>>installation of
>>>>>debian-jessie and ubuntu 14.04.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, it was probably a non-reproducible "fluke", but it's
worth being
>>>>aware
>>>>of. I haven't seen it fail ever before.
>>>
>>>It looks like the execution of the test slowed
>>>down (was paused or whatever) and the negative cache expired.
>>>Maybe the VM did not have enough resources from the host and
>>>slowed down execution. Or some other random strangeness.
>>
>>Ah, thank you Michal. It then joins the dyndns test (and some other) in the
>>group of timing-dependent tests. We'll have to do something about these.
>>The
>>VM environment load is not very predictable and it's better not to have
>>randomly-failing tests in CI for whatever reason. Can we somehow
>>increase the
>>time window size for them, perhaps?
>
>Increasing the time window is possible. It is currently set to
>one second in the tests. If it fails in the future again, we
>can double it. But one second should be really a lot for what
>it does so I would keep it as is for now.
Sure, let's see how it goes, thank you.
I see dyndns failures much more often, do you know if we can do anything about
that?
It is a known problem https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2283
Unfortunately, it is in deferred bucket.
Feel free to assign that ticket to yourself.
LS
11:52 a.m.
On 10/02/2014 04:25 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (02/10/14 15:56), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> I see dyndns failures much more often, do you know if we can do anything about
> that?
It is a known problem https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2283
Unfortunately, it is in deferred bucket.
Feel free to assign that ticket to yourself.
Thanks Lukas, I'll dig the logs and see if this is related.
Nick
3486
days inactive
3488
days old
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
16 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Jakub Hrozek -
Lukas Slebodnik -
Michal Židek -
Nikolai Kondrashov -
Pavel Reichl