Bug #3993
closedTechnique 'Service Management': Having more processes than authorized return success
Description
Thanks to Cédric Cabessa, a bug has speen discovered into the Technique 'Process Management' concerning the number of processes watched. Indeed, when the number of processes authorized is excedeed, no particular action is made by the agent and a success report is returned.
An example is with the process 'sleep': http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/8558/gpsj.png
Updated by Nicolas PERRON about 11 years ago
If the minimum is 2 and maximum is 3, the result will be:
For a correct number of processes:
$ ps axf | grep sleep 24952 pts/0 S+ 0:00 \_ grep sleep 24187 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 24209 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 24782 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 $ sudo /var/rudder/cfengine-community/bin/cf-agent -KIb process_management >> Using command line specified bundlesequence !! process_count and restart_class should not be used in the same promise as this makes no sense Promise (version not specified) belongs to bundle 'check_process' in file '/var/rudder/cfengine-community/inputs/processManagement/1.1/processManagement.cf' near line 51 Comment: Enforcing process parameters R: @@ProcessManagement@@log_info@@88853dba-63e4-45fe-8f1f-17cbd3801bd0@@4c12ea25-7637-44a2-b899-2c7229979e88@@2@@Process@@sleep@@2013-10-04 14:12:19+02:00##root@#sleep: the process instance count is out of the permitted range R: @@ProcessManagement@@result_success@@88853dba-63e4-45fe-8f1f-17cbd3801bd0@@4c12ea25-7637-44a2-b899-2c7229979e88@@2@@Process@@sleep@@2013-10-04 14:12:19+02:00##root@#sleep: the process was in range (3-2) !! process_count and restart_class should not be used in the same promise as this makes no sense Promise (version not specified) belongs to bundle 'check_process' in file '/var/rudder/cfengine-community/inputs/processManagement/1.1/processManagement.cf' near line 51 Comment: Enforcing process parameters !! process_count and restart_class should not be used in the same promise as this makes no sense Promise (version not specified) belongs to bundle 'check_process' in file '/var/rudder/cfengine-community/inputs/processManagement/1.1/processManagement.cf' near line 51 Comment: Enforcing process parameters !! Method invoked repairs
For a number of processes over the range definied:
$ ps axf | grep sleep 25032 pts/0 S+ 0:00 \_ grep sleep 24187 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 24209 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 24782 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 24803 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 24824 ? S 0:00 /bin/sleep 3600 $ sudo /var/rudder/cfengine-community/bin/cf-agent -KIb process_management !! Duplicate selection of value for variable "execRun" in scope g !! Rule from /var/rudder/cfengine-community/inputs/processManagement/1.1/processManagement.cf at/before line 0 >> Using command line specified bundlesequence !! process_count and restart_class should not be used in the same promise as this makes no sense Promise (version not specified) belongs to bundle 'check_process' in file '/var/rudder/cfengine-community/inputs/processManagement/1.1/processManagement.cf' near line 51 Comment: Enforcing process parameters R: @@ProcessManagement@@log_info@@88853dba-63e4-45fe-8f1f-17cbd3801bd0@@4c12ea25-7637-44a2-b899-2c7229979e88@@2@@Process@@sleep@@2013-10-04 14:12:32+02:00##root@#sleep: the process instance count is out of the permitted range R: @@ProcessManagement@@result_success@@88853dba-63e4-45fe-8f1f-17cbd3801bd0@@4c12ea25-7637-44a2-b899-2c7229979e88@@2@@Process@@sleep@@2013-10-04 14:12:32+02:00##root@#sleep: the process was in range (3-2) !! process_count and restart_class should not be used in the same promise as this makes no sense Promise (version not specified) belongs to bundle 'check_process' in file '/var/rudder/cfengine-community/inputs/processManagement/1.1/processManagement.cf' near line 51 Comment: Enforcing process parameters !! process_count and restart_class should not be used in the same promise as this makes no sense Promise (version not specified) belongs to bundle 'check_process' in file '/var/rudder/cfengine-community/inputs/processManagement/1.1/processManagement.cf' near line 51 Comment: Enforcing process parameters !! Method invoked repairs
Then, a log_info will be displayed but no action will be applied.
Updated by Nicolas PERRON about 11 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.4.10 to 2.4.11
Updated by Nicolas PERRON about 11 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.4.11 to 2.4.12
Updated by Nicolas PERRON about 11 years ago
- Priority changed from N/A to 3
- Target version changed from 2.4.12 to 2.4.13
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 11 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.4.13 to 2.6.11
Since version 2.4 is not maintained anymore, retargeting to branch 2.6
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.11 to 2.6.12
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.12 to 2.6.13
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.13 to 2.6.14
Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.14 to 2.6.16
Updated by Jonathan CLARKE over 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.16 to 2.6.17
Updated by Nicolas PERRON over 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.17 to 2.6.18
Updated by Matthieu CERDA about 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.18 to 2.6.19
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.6.19 to 2.6.20
Updated by François ARMAND almost 10 years ago
- Assignee set to Benoît PECCATTE
- Target version changed from 2.6.20 to 2.10.10
Benoit, could you try to reproduce that one. It seems rather bad.
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 10 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.10 to 2.10.11
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.11 to 2.10.12
Updated by Benoît PECCATTE over 9 years ago
- Project changed from 24 to Rudder
- Category changed from Techniques to Techniques
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.12 to 2.10.13
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.13 to 2.10.14
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.14 to 2.10.15
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.15 to 2.10.16
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.16 to 2.10.17
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.17 to 2.10.18
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.18 to 2.10.19
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.19 to 2.10.20
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.10.20 to 2.11.18
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 9 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.11.18 to 2.11.19
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.11.19 to 2.11.20
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.11.20 to 2.11.21
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.11.21 to 2.11.22
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.11.22 to 2.11.23
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.11.23 to 2.11.24
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 2.11.24 to 308
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 308 to 3.1.14
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.14 to 3.1.15
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.15 to 3.1.16
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.16 to 3.1.17
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.17 to 3.1.18
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.18 to 3.1.19
Updated by François ARMAND over 7 years ago
- Severity set to Critical - prevents main use of Rudder | no workaround | data loss | security
- User visibility set to Getting started - demo | first install | level 1 Techniques
- Priority set to 0
This need to be tested to know if it is still present with the new "service" technique. If so, it is critical because it can lead to DOS quite easely.
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.19 to 3.1.20
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.20 to 3.1.21
Updated by François ARMAND over 7 years ago
- Subject changed from Technique 'Process Management': Having more processes than authorized return success to Technique 'Service Management': Having more processes than authorized return success
- Severity changed from Critical - prevents main use of Rudder | no workaround | data loss | security to Major - prevents use of part of Rudder | no simple workaround
- Priority changed from 0 to 48
We should ensure that "service management" has also the bug (it should)
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.21 to 3.1.22
Updated by Alexis Mousset over 7 years ago
This happens because we have both a restart class an process count in the same promise:
process_count and restart_class should not be used in the same promise as this makes no sense
The process count check is skipped in this case.
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.22 to 3.1.23
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.23 to 3.1.24
- Priority changed from 63 to 64
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.24 to 3.1.25
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 3.1.25 to 387
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 387 to 4.1.10
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 7 years ago
- Target version changed from 4.1.10 to 4.1.11
- Priority changed from 65 to 66
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 6 years ago
- Target version changed from 4.1.11 to 4.1.12
- Priority changed from 66 to 67
Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ over 6 years ago
- Target version changed from 4.1.12 to 4.1.13
- Priority changed from 67 to 68
Updated by Benoît PECCATTE over 6 years ago
- Assignee changed from Alexis Mousset to Nicolas CHARLES
Updated by Nicolas CHARLES over 6 years ago
Testing with 2 to 3 sleep process, with 5 running
The message is
E| error ServicesManagement Advanced options sleep The process range for service sleep was not correct, but was repaired
so it does not return success, but the end of the message is confusing
Updated by Nicolas CHARLES over 6 years ago
- Status changed from New to Rejected
Actually technique Process Management doesn't exist any more !