[11:30] * benji needs some coffee. [12:08] bac benji call in 2 [12:08] rt [13:45] well, I'm now able to change the code for that stored procedure, but I can't get any debugging info out of it [13:53] :-/ [13:55] We have another new test failure (seemingly not a test isolation error this time). Which is, you know, just so gosh darn dispiriting that I think the company really ought to support me going over to the local IMAX theater to watch the Avengers this afternoon, just to, you know, buck up my spirits. [13:58] heh [14:14] huh, that failure happened again: bug 994602 [14:15] <_mup_> Bug #994602: lib/lp/services/webapp/tests/cookie-authentication.txt fails rarely/intermittently in tests < https://launchpad.net/bugs/994602 > [14:15] can't dupe locally [14:44] babysitting/lunch [14:45] wgrant says 994602 is his fault [14:45] we also have an instance of "the wrong number of tests are reported" to investigate [14:46] I definitely got the subunit output this time [15:00] interesting, if I isolate just the test that fails, it doesn't; there is some sort of intra-test isolation problem going on [15:09] gary_poster: I just submitted my April EC2 expenses (just under $100) [15:29] approved benji [15:29] thanks [16:02] benji, fun with PG 9.1, eh? :-) [16:03] :) [16:35] benji, here's something interesting (and unrelated yo your current work): take a glance at http://ec2-184-73-44-105.compute-1.amazonaws.com:8010/builders/lucid_lp/builds/0 . The number of tests run is low. Click on the worker-2 log to see why. (I don't know why that happened.) [16:36] gary_poster: that's interesting [16:37] gary_poster: the "subunit" log has no entries for worker-2 [16:37] exactle benji [16:37] y [16:37] the string "worker-2" is not in the subunit log [16:38] benji, ah-ha [16:38] http://ec2-184-73-44-105.compute-1.amazonaws.com:8010/builders/lucid_lp/builds/0/steps/shell_8/logs/stdio [16:39] near the top [16:39] everything seems to be going fine, with 8 lxc-start-ephemerals [16:39] but then "could not get IP address - aborting." [16:39] and "Stopping lxc" [16:39] "could not get IP address - aborting. [16:39] " [16:39] lxcip may help with that [16:40] or maybe we just need a bigger timeout [16:40] feels race-y [16:40] I'm not sure we are racing anything [16:40] just things too longer than expected [16:42] it's a timed race ;) [16:42] benji, look at "less `which lxc-start-ephemeral`" (or choose your voibng poison of course) and search for ""could not get IP address - aborting." [16:43] If only I knew what the heck "[ 0 -eq $? -a -n "$IP_ADDRESS" ]" means. [16:45] "the last exit code was 0 and we have an ip address" [16:45] so the line before that if statement failed [16:46] we should retry that [16:46] rather than just giving up immediately [16:46] ideally we'd have lxcip [16:46] since that does everything for us in a nicer way [16:47] so we're loosing a race with $LEASES being populated, retrying seems eminently reasonable [16:47] yeah [16:48] I'll talk to hallyn about it [17:01] * benji (long) lunches. [17:33] gary_poster, Can we schedule our annual review call for Monday or Wednesday next week? I have free time in the mornings, and it seems to make sense to get it done next week rather than taking up hacking time with it. [17:34] hey gmb. +1. Monday would be slightly easier but Wed is fine too. Choose a time that's not too late, you west coaster you. :-) [17:35] gmb, just put it on the Google calendar? [17:35] gary_poster, Yep, I will do. Monday is fine. [17:36] cool, thank you [17:37] gary_poster, Done. [17:38] accepted, gmb [17:38] Thanks. [19:43] benji, out of morbid, look-at-the-crash-on-the-side-of-the-road curiosity, have you managed to get postgres 9.1 working? [19:44] gary_poster: I gave up trying to upgrade (a clone of) my lxc lucid container (which in hindsight wasn't a good idea anyway) and am building a new precise container now [19:45] benji, a precise container? postgres 9.1 won't work in lucid? [19:46] gary_poster: it might but I exceeded my self-imposed timebox without getting it to work [19:46] I see [19:46] switching to precise introduces so many other variables though... [19:46] and if you get it working there we have to figure out how to get it working in lucid anyway [19:47] gary_poster: do you think it won't work out of the box? [19:47] benji, what is "it" in that sentence? :-) [19:47] gary_poster: Everything!! :P [19:48] lol [19:48] (LP) [19:48] (LP on precise) [19:48] (LP on precise with postgres 9.1) [19:49] I was under the (apparently wrong) impression that precise was the best bet for a working LP. I get the feeling that lucid would be better. [19:49] benji, so you are asking if I think LP will work on Precise? wgrant recently closed a bug for getting LP to run on precise, so I suspect it will. [19:49] it has only been working in precise for a week or two at most [19:49] and we are still running LP on Lucid [19:49] I regret my decision. [19:49] :-) [19:50] running LP on Lucid in production I mean [19:51] I'm goign to kill the precise setuplxc and start a new lucid one in the hope that it will a) work, and b) install postgres 9.1 by default (which I think it will) [19:51] benji, since you've already gone down that road it might still be interesting; however, we'll need to get it working in Lucid anyway if this actually fixes anything. (Or we have to switch production and our whole lxc setup in containers to Precise) [19:51] but that sounds like a good plan too [19:52] I mean, ugh [19:52] I like voice dictation :-P [19:52] You *could* keep trying the precise road; might be interesting. However the Lucid plan does sound better to me. [19:53] There we go. [19:53] you need a stenographer [19:53] I'll hire one posthastee [19:53] eeee [19:54] I've heard the whole stenographer biz has changed a lot just in the past year or so [19:54] been reading the stenographer trade mags again? [19:54] computerized voice recognition has changed the stenographer's job to being more like an editor [19:55] no, a mom at the elementary school does that part time and was talking about it :-) [19:59] gary_poster: well, with this running I have some time if you're wanting to do the yearly review call [20:00] benji, sure. 4:05? That will give me a chance to prepare. By which I mean, uh, preparing. Uh, never mind. $:-5? [20:00] 4:05? [20:00] heh, sure [20:00] cool [20:06] benji, https://talkgadget.google.com/hangouts/_/extras/canonical.com/goldenhordeoneonone awaits [21:20] have a good weekend gentlemens [21:54] you too [21:54] bye