Launchpad itself

BuildQueue.destroySelf erroneously assumes that all jobs are Storm objects

Bug #549340 reported by William Grant
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Launchpad itself
Invalid
Undecided
William Grant

Bug Description

BuildQueue.destroySelf does this:

  Store.of(specific_job).remove(specific_job)

That doesn't work for TranslationsTemplateBuildJobs, which are not themselves Storm objects (their BranchJob is). specific_job.destroySelf() may be better.

Related branches

lp:~wgrant/launchpad/bug-549340-fix-buildqueue-destruction
Rejected for merging into lp:launchpad
Julian Edwards (community): Disapprove
Diff: 152 lines (+52/-2)
7 files modified
database/schema/security.cfg (+1/-1)
lib/lp/buildmaster/model/buildqueue.py (+1/-1)
lib/lp/code/model/sourcepackagerecipebuild.py (+4/-0)
lib/lp/code/tests/test_sourcepackagerecipebuild.py (+18/-0)
lib/lp/soyuz/interfaces/buildfarmbuildjob.py (+6/-0)
lib/lp/soyuz/model/buildpackagejob.py (+5/-0)
lib/lp/translations/tests/test_translationtemplatesbuildjob.py (+17/-0)
William Grant (wgrant)
Changed in soyuz:
status: New → In Progress
assignee: nobody → William Grant (wgrant)
Revision history for this message
Julian Edwards (julian-edwards) wrote : Re: [Bug 549340] [NEW] BuildQueue.destroySelf erroneously assumes that all jobs are Storm objects

On Saturday 27 March 2010 04:42:06 you wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> BuildQueue.destroySelf does this:
>
> Store.of(specific_job).remove(specific_job)
>
> That doesn't work for TranslationsTemplateBuildJobs, which are not
> themselves Storm objects (their BranchJob is).
> specific_job.destroySelf() may be better.

Hmm.

We should really be using Storm objects for any new database objects, why is
TranslationsTemplateBuildJob not so?

Revision history for this message
William Grant (wgrant) wrote :

On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 09:54 +0000, Julian Edwards wrote:
> On Saturday 27 March 2010 04:42:06 you wrote:
> > Public bug reported:
> >
> > BuildQueue.destroySelf does this:
> >
> > Store.of(specific_job).remove(specific_job)
> >
> > That doesn't work for TranslationsTemplateBuildJobs, which are not
> > themselves Storm objects (their BranchJob is).
> > specific_job.destroySelf() may be better.
>
> Hmm.
>
> We should really be using Storm objects for any new database objects, why is
> TranslationsTemplateBuildJob not so?

There is no TTBJ table -- it is represented by a BranchJob in the DB,
and somehow gets materialised as a TTBJ.

Revision history for this message
Julian Edwards (julian-edwards) wrote :

On Sunday 28 March 2010 11:13:50 William Grant wrote:
> There is no TTBJ table -- it is represented by a BranchJob in the DB,
> and somehow gets materialised as a TTBJ.

Ewwwww.

TranslationsTemplateBuildJob should be a real table (Storm of course) as
previously discussed, so that build history can be interrogated.

Revision history for this message
Julian Edwards (julian-edwards) wrote :

I'm tempted to mark this invalid, since there *should* be a storm object there. It's completely weird that a translations job ends up as a BranchJob.

Revision history for this message
Julian Edwards (julian-edwards) wrote :

Marked invalid as discussed. All jobs *should* be Storm objects.

Changed in soyuz:
status: In Progress → Invalid
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.
Subscribing...

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.