pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] json pmda qa/1052 failing on Centos6.6

To: David Smith <dsmith@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] json pmda qa/1052 failing on Centos6.6
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 21:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, PCP <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <55BFC26D.8040503@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <017301d0cc28$d7c78640$875692c0$@internode.on.net> <440072288.2807362.1438581950952.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <55BFC26D.8040503@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: s3iHspfacjg9SOyAKdQsUUqJw6uQDg==
Thread-topic: json pmda qa/1052 failing on Centos6.6
Hi David,

----- Original Message -----
> On 08/03/2015 01:05 AM, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > Hi Ken,
> > 
> > David looked into a problem with the python JSON APIs on RHEL6
> > not supporting all the features needed by pmdajson (IIRC) - it
> > may be this is the same issue.  The lack of diagnostics is not
> > helping though, so I can't really tell.
> 
> The lack of diagnostics when developing a python PMDA is a real
> pain-in-you-know-where. One of the reasons why there are so many
> try/except statements in the JSON PMDA is that that's the only way I
> could see python exceptions.

Good point - we should possibly have a try/catch inside the run()
method?  (in pcp.pmda I mean, as a catch-all exception fallback - I
think we are still exposed to missed exceptions there atm).  I'll look
into that for next release.

> As far as the failure itself goes, without more information about the
> system itself I couldn't even guess.

It'd be a bog standard Centos 6.6 machine, with just enough life-support
installed to run pcp/qa, I believe.

cheers.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>