[Bug 1111189] New: yumBackend started with each `docker start`

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

Broken dependencies: docker-io

[Bug 1159935] "docker events...

Red Hat Bugzilla

19 Jun 2014 19 Jun '14

8:31 a.m.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Bug ID: 1111189 Summary: yumBackend started with each `docker start` Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: docker-io Assignee: lsm5@redhat.com Reporter: ldoktor@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: admiller@redhat.com, golang@lists.fedoraproject.org, hushan.jia@gmail.com, lsm5@redhat.com, mattdm@redhat.com, mgoldman@redhat.com, s@shk.io, vbatts@redhat.com

Description of problem: Hello guys, today I noticed 100% utilization followed by each `docker run` or `docker start`. It wasn't caused by the docker itself, but with each instance, yumBackend is executed. It never happened with older version.

4806 ? RN 0:00 /usr/bin/python /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yuBackend.py get-updates none

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): docker-io-1.0.0-1.fc20.x86_64

How reproducible: always

Steps to Reproduce: 1. docker run -t -i fedora bash 2. top 3. ps ax |grep yum

Actual results: yumBackend is started and takes couple of secconds in 100% utilization 4806 ? RN 0:00 /usr/bin/python /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yuBackend.py get-updates none

Expected results: Apart from container no other processes should be started. (I can run `docker run -t -i fedora bash -c exit` which finishes immediately and the only process using cpu is the yumBackend process)

Additional info: I tried executing `busybox sh`, `bash -c exit`, .... I even rebooted the machine but the results are the same.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Show replies by date

Red Hat Bugzilla

23 Jun 23 Jun

8:46 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dwalsh@redhat.com

--- Comment #1 from Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com --- I have no idea why. I don't there is any communications between docker daemon and yum backend.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

24 Jun 24 Jun

5:18 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Lokesh Mandvekar lsm5@switzerlandmail.ch changed:

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

22 Jul 22 Jul

1:43 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

23 Aug 23 Aug

12:37 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #2 from Lokesh Mandvekar lsm5@fedoraproject.org --- Lukas, this doesn't seem to occur with 1.1.2 anymore. Could you verify this please?

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

5 Sep 5 Sep

4:26 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #3 from Lukas Doktor ldoktor@redhat.com --- Hi Lokesh, it's probably system-dependant, because I still see this failure and it annoys me. After a while of spawning and removing containers I end up with 100% utilization which takes hours to finish. My /var/log/messages is full of:

Sep 5 10:18:47 t530 PackageKit: update-packages transaction /46549_daebdbbc from uid 1000 finished with success after 3999ms Sep 5 10:18:51 t530 PackageKit: update-packages transaction /46550_cdeacbdb from uid 1000 finished with success after 3951ms Sep 5 10:18:55 t530 PackageKit: update-packages transaction /46551_ecdabbbc from uid 1000 finished with success after 4399ms Sep 5 10:18:59 t530 PackageKit: update-packages transaction /46552_ccdcaedd from uid 1000 finished with success after 3992ms Sep 5 10:19:03 t530 PackageKit: update-packages transaction /46553_bedacbcd from uid 1000 finished with success after 3986ms Sep 5 10:19:07 t530 PackageKit: update-packages transaction /46554_ecaddbac from uid 1000 finished with success after 4011ms Sep 5 10:19:11 t530 PackageKit: update-packages transaction /46555_dbecccce from uid 1000 finished with success after 3937ms

Right now I'm using docker-io-1.2.0-2.fc20.x86_64. Good thing is that when I execute `yum clean all` it stops. Anyway once I start another container. Do you know any method to see what asked for this yumBackend?

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

7 Sep 7 Sep

7:47 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #4 from Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com --- Is this a generic container? IE Does this happen for other container images besides Fedora?

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

10 Sep 10 Sep

3:50 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #5 from Lukas Doktor ldoktor@redhat.com --- Hi Daniel, it's not related to the image. I can use busybox as well. Also simple `docker pull busybox:latest` also generates multiple `update-packages` transactions. (starting after the first layer is downloaded, so probably one per each image layer).

I also tried clean installation (and couple of setting, program installation, ...) of Fedora 20 (the same I have) and the problem was not there. So either you have to have specific programs installed or configuration set or just run long enough...

Dan, is there a way to trace who asks for the update-packages?

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

8:43 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com changed:

--- Comment #6 from Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com --- PackageKit guys, do you have any idea what could cause this?

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

9 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu --- I would guess that *something* is talking to PackageKit via dbus. Hard to tell what that "something" is yet, without more extensive logging here.

Probably depends on what is in the docker image and what it is doing (anything yet?). things off the top of my head that can hit PackageKit include: PackageKit-command-not-found apper/gnome-packagekit auto codec/font/printer-driver installs

Offhand, it may be best to simply omit PackageKit from your docker image too, as I doubt any of those things would be very useful.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

10:12 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #8 from Lokesh Mandvekar lsm5@fedoraproject.org --- Hmm, PackageKit isn't present in the fedora image (not sure about the other images though)

bash-4.2# rpm -q PackageKit package PackageKit is not installed

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

10:19 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu changed:

--- Comment #9 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu --- ok, maybe I'm confused. I assumed PackageKit was running inside the docker image. Reporter, can you clarify (and mention which docker images you used specifically that exhibits this problem)?

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

11:15 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Lukas Doktor ldoktor@redhat.com changed:

--- Comment #10 from Lukas Doktor ldoktor@redhat.com --- Hi guys, it's the host machine, which is running the PackageKit. Containers are just sitting there waiting for any command (as written before, the same behavior for busybox image or even `docker pull ...` which - if I'm not mistaken - doesn't run any containers).

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

12:03 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #11 from Lukas Doktor ldoktor@redhat.com --- Created attachment 936228 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=936228&action=edit dbus-monitor --system output

This is the `dbus-monitor --system` output. After the monitor started I executed `docker run -t -i busybox bash`, which initiated yumBackend in host and lead to 100% utilization of the host machine.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

11 Nov 11 Nov

11:35 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #12 from Lukas Doktor ldoktor@redhat.com --- I see I didn't attach the yumBackend cmdline which is executed:

8449 ? RN 0:01 /usr/bin/python /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py update-packages only-trusted;only-download qemu-user;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-pdfimport;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-arm;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-img;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&ibus-gtk2;1.5.9-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&autocorr-cs;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;noarch;updates&firebird-libfbembed;2.5.2.26539.0-9.fc20;x86_64;updates&teamd;1.13-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&perl-Package-Constants;1:0.02-291.fc20;noarch;updates&python3-libs;3.3.2-18.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-moxie;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-core;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&chkconfig;1.3.63-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-ppc;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-s390x;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-opensymbol-fonts;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;noarch;updates&python3;3.3.2-18.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-mips;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&google-noto-sans-mandaic-fonts;20141001-2.fc20;noarch;updates&qemu-system-lm32;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&perl;4:5.18.4-291.fc20;x86_64;updates&google-noto-s! ans-lisu-fonts;20141001-2.fc20;noarch;updates&libteam;1.13-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-writer;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-graphicfilter;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&hdparm;9.45-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-pyuno;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&ntsysv;1.3.63-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-calc;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&perl-libs;4:5.18.4-291.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-x86;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-guest-agent;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&audit-libs;2.4.1-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-sh4;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-emailmerge;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&firebird-libfbclient;2.5.2.26539.0-9.fc20;x86_64;updates&unzip;6.0-13.fc20;x86_64;updates&python-devel;2.7.5-15.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-or32;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-ure;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&libcurl;7.32.0-15.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-math;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&perl-ExtUtils-Install;1.59-291.fc20! ;noarch;updates&qemu-system-microblaze;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;! updates&audit-libs-python;2.4.1-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&perl-Module-CoreList;1:3.13-291.fc20;noarch;updates&curl;7.32.0-15.fc20;x86_64;updates&perl-macros;4:5.18.4-291.fc20;x86_64;updates&perl-Pod-Escapes;1:1.04-291.fc20;noarch;updates&libreoffice-impress;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&docker;1.5-10.fc20;x86_64;fedora&libpurple;2.10.10-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&google-noto-sans-tai-viet-fonts;20141001-2.fc20;noarch;updates&ibus-setup;1.5.9-4.fc20;noarch;updates&perl-devel;4:5.18.4-291.fc20;x86_64;updates&python-libs;2.7.5-15.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-sparc;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&tkinter;2.7.5-15.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-cris;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-common;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&libcacard;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&autocorr-en;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;noarch;updates&qemu-system-unicore32;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-m68k;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&ibus-libs;1.5.9-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-draw;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;! updates&audit-libs;2.4.1-1.fc20;i686;updates&audit;2.4.1-1.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-system-xtensa;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&ibus-gtk3;1.5.9-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&python;2.7.5-15.fc20;x86_64;updates&ibus-wayland;1.5.9-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&libreoffice-langpack-cs;1:4.2.7.2-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&virt-manager-common;1.0.1-5.fc20;noarch;updates&google-noto-sans-meeteimayek-fonts;20141001-2.fc20;noarch;updates&qemu-system-alpha;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&google-noto-sans-tagalog-fonts;20141001-2.fc20;noarch;updates&google-noto-sans-tai-tham-fonts;20141001-2.fc20;noarch;updates&selinux-policy-targeted;3.12.1-193.fc20;noarch;updates&virt-manager;1.0.1-5.fc20;noarch;updates&qemu;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&ibus;1.5.9-4.fc20;x86_64;updates&qemu-kvm;2:1.6.2-10.fc20;x86_64;updates&selinux-policy;3.12.1-193.fc20;noarch;updates&perl-IO-Zlib;1:1.10-291.fc20;noarch;updates&device-mapper-persistent-data;0.4.1-1.fc20;x86_64;updates

I hope it will help, although I haven't seen this error on any other systems but mine...

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

29 May 29 May

8:09 a.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

--- Comment #13 from Fedora End Of Life endoflife@fedoraproject.org --- This message is a reminder that Fedora 20 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 20. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '20'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 20 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

Red Hat Bugzilla

2:03 p.m.

New subject: [Bug 1111189] yumBackend started with each `docker start`

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111189

Kalev Lember kalevlember@gmail.com changed:

--- Comment #14 from Kalev Lember kalevlember@gmail.com --- This is fixed in F21+ where PackageKit uses the hif backend instead of yum.

-- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

3398

Age (days ago)

3742

Last active (days ago)

golang@lists.fedoraproject.org

16 comments

1 participants

tags (0)

participants (1)

Red Hat Bugzilla