error during juju-wait ERROR cannot load cookies: file locked for too long; giving up: cannot acquire lock: resource temporarily unavailable
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Canonical Juju |
Fix Released
|
Critical
|
Michael Foord | ||
2.0 |
Fix Released
|
Critical
|
Michael Foord | ||
Juju Wait Plugin |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
This is the pipeline: http://
While systems were deploying, we hit error below while doing a juju-wait.
Version of juju wait is 2.3.8-0~
and this was with juju 2.0 beta18: 2.0-beta18-
From console:
Related "nexentaedge-
Related "nexentaedge-
Bundle has one or more containers specified as lxc. lxc containers are deprecated in Juju 2.0. lxd containers will be deployed instead.
Deploy of bundle completed.
2016-10-11 09:12:40,273 [INFO] oil_ci.juju.juju2: Waiting up to two hours for deployment to stabilize
ERROR:root:ERROR cannot load cookies: file locked for too long; giving up: cannot acquire lock: resource temporarily unavailable
ERROR:root:juju status --format=json failed: 1
2016-10-11 09:15:31,711 [ERROR] oil_ci.
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/
rc = juju2.deploy(
File "/usr/lib/
check_
File "/usr/lib/
raise CalledProcessEr
CalledProcessError: Command '['timeout', '7200', 'juju-2.0', 'wait', '-e', u'ci-oil-
Including juju status file and log file from the controller node.
Changed in juju: | |
status: | Incomplete → New |
Changed in juju: | |
importance: | Medium → High |
Changed in juju: | |
assignee: | nobody → Richard Harding (rharding) |
Changed in juju: | |
importance: | High → Critical |
assignee: | Richard Harding (rharding) → Katherine Cox-Buday (cox-katherine-e) |
Changed in juju: | |
milestone: | 2.1.0 → 2.0.3 |
milestone: | 2.0.3 → 2.1.0 |
Changed in juju: | |
milestone: | 2.1.0 → 2.1-beta1 |
milestone: | 2.1-beta1 → 2.1-beta2 |
Changed in juju: | |
status: | Fix Committed → Fix Released |
If "wait" plugin logs out, but we have just fixed clearing cookies on logout as part of bug # 1621375 on master tip.
Is there a chance that this can be re-tested with master tip?
It would be great to have this part of our QA testing...