D4Science Infrastructure

Ciro Formisano wrote:

Please, may you grant me the access to the machine hosting DMPM instance? I need to have a look at the logs and at the deployment.

Done. you can access as gcube

My colleague @g.panichi@isti.cnr.it discovered the issue. The "foreach" package was declared as a required package but does not appear in the list of installed packages on the SVN. Indeed, it is installed on the DataMiner (I guess it is a legacy package installed during the DM installation).
However, the issue with the DM Pool Manager remains, because the error returned to the SAI cannot be related in any way to the problem and this makes the system poorly usable. Please, check why the DM Pool Manager error reporting is not working in this case.

Thank you for the help Gianpaolo, it has been very important to identify the root cause.
Unluckily I have not so deep experience on DMPM code and Nunzio is currently OoO, so the support I can give is very limited. However the problem seems not strictly affecting the functionality of the tool, so an intervention can be not immediate and better discussed.
Concerning the issue, as I can see from the code, it seems that the behavior you mentioned is normal: it seems that if any dependency is not defined at SVN level, the log file is not written and only a mail notification is sent (has it arrived?). I kindly ask @nunzioandrea.galante@eng.it if my impression is correct. In this case I think that the best solution is to discuss if this behavior is OK (probably not), and how it should be changed, but I would avoid to change it in production now, but as an improvement for the next releases.

The email is sent correctly and contains the issue but the message sent to SAI doesn't. @g.panichi@isti.cnr.it says this was correctly managed "before".

The current version of DMPM always creates the status file and updates it, and creates the log file only to log the installation work. If the installation work does not start the log file is not created and the user is notified by email. This behavior makes sense, but if, as said by @g.panichi@isti.cnr.it, there are use cases in which email notification is not enough, we could modify it.

In case of SVN dependency failure we could add the same information included in the email on the log file. Is it OK? Are there any other similar use cases to check?
I kindly ask @gianpaolo.coro@isti.cnr.it and @g.panichi@isti.cnr.it to comment: if we agree on the sulution it will be released with gCube 4.9.

Yes, in case of SVN dependency failure we could add the same information included in the email on the log file. Consider that any kind of error should be reported to the user in a log file that can be accessed through a public link, this is to give feedback to the user in the portlet.
In addition, emails should always be sent to trace the operations and also to give feedback to administrators who are sometimes called upon to resolve the issues. In many cases these things are already done, you just have to check and add missing cases.