Hey Jordan, and Chris, and everyone,
This is great. Thanks so much!
Sent from my phone. Please excuse formatting and brevity.
Jordan Cwang <Jordan.Cwang(a)senecacollege.ca> wrote:
I've set up a trac instance at Seneca for people to file issues with our Koji, infrastructure, or any other problems that may arise. You can check it out at http://trac.proximity.on.ca/projects/fedoraarm
Additonally, I've set up a RPFR Trac instance as well. That is at http://trac.proximity.on.ca/projects/rpfr.
If you have any questions, comments or suggestions regarding these instances, let me know.
I apologize if I should have RTFM. If a platform provides a device tree
at boot time, and the kernel also has a tree appended, what behavior is
supposed to happen? i.e. what is the standard that is anticipated here?
> > 6) Your topic here
> Koji: There have been a number of issues over the last couple of weeks
> that have been bought up and I haven't seen any form of update from
> Seneca as to the state:
> - DB perf tuning, it was done or at least there was an outage. What
> was the outcome
* The dump and restore worked in shrinking our db size and cleaning
old entries from our tables. Auto-vacuum seems to be broken or not
working as we expected it but manual vacuum seems to work well on
all of the tables.
> - repo issues (the generally perl based build failures due to repo
> issues). I reported I thought I had found the offending host but the
> issue appears to have come back. Was the host re-enabled, what testing
> has Seneca done?
* Could you please provide the specific task links as examples or names
of hosts that are causing the problem so we could diagnose the problem
and look into resolving it?
> - builder issues, seeing issues with things like the disk space on the
> large builders without a resolution, or a resolution being reported.
> What is the status, is it fixed?
* What are the problems with the large builders? Are there RAM issues,
permission issues, low space issues? Which builders need to be looked at
specifically because it's hard to solve this without the needed info.
> - Some people have remote access to the builders via a ssh key but it
> appears that not all build hosts are configured for this. What's the
> steps to resolution so that people can support the platform?
* We specifically setup bcfg2 across all builders which helps to distribute
our keys to them. If you would like access as you are describing then
please contact one of us and we can generate an ssh key on hongkong so
that you can login to the builders without a password. I believe this option
was offered by one of my co-workers but was denied by a certain person so ya. :/
I'm sorry if it seems like I'm not following along here in close detail
but our team has various other projects that we are working on simultaneously
and sometimes we don't have time to monitor in close detail what exactly is
happening in the farm. If you're able to point out specific examples of something
failing and highlight all of our names in channel, I will at least definitely be
able to see who it is and what is happening, hopefully.
Sorry if things seem to not be working...
I have the following interim fix for prelink, until we get upstream
prelink to recognize that there might be two different possible linker
paths on the same architecture. It's trivially correct, and described
within the patch below. Tested.