It's related to iptables. Setting `stopIptables: true` fixes the problem. But setting `openIptables: true` does not - I though this odd, since something is configuring the AWS security group correctly, so I don't understand why it isn't also configuring iptables with the same data...
Richard. On 16 May 2017 at 20:37, Richard Downer <[email protected]> wrote: > Urgh, we'd better investigate. If there's a failure in one of our "try > this to get started!" blueprints I'd consider that a release blocker. > Hopefully there's a good reason, or at least a simple workaround... > > Richard. > > On 16 May 2017 at 17:28, Geoff Macartney <geoff.macartney@ > cloudsoftcorp.com> wrote: > >> I get this too Richard: >> >> start failed with error: >> org.apache.brooklyn.util.core.task.DynamicSequentialTask$Que >> ueAbortedException: >> Cannot add a task to Task[start]@iEOrS6Mt whose queue has been aborted >> (trying to add Task[Cross-context execution: Invoking effector joinCluster >> on RiakNode:d5gt with parameters {nodeName= >> [email protected]}]@U09W94lm) >> >> Failure running task Cross-context execution: Invoking effector >> joinCluster >> on RiakNode:vrua with parameters {nodeName= >> [email protected]} (lpAS8V4t): >> Error >> invoking joinCluster at RiakNodeImpl{id=vrua9dk6kf}: Execution failed, >> invalid result 1 for joinCluster RiakNodeImpl{id=vrua9dk6kf} >> >> >> >> On Tue, 16 May 2017 at 17:03 Richard Downer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hello all, >> > >> > I'm trying out the rc3 and seeing a problem. If I deploy the "Template >> 3" >> > app (web server + Riak cluster) from the "New Application" window, then >> the >> > individual cluster nodes appear to start, but the cluster as a whole >> goes >> > on fire. >> > >> > Drilling down, it appears to be a "join cluster" activity which is >> failing. >> > The stdout of the task says: >> > "Node [email protected] is not >> > reachable!" >> > >> > This is running in AWS EC2 in eu-central-1 - everything is in the same >> > region. >> > >> > Can anybody else reproduce? >> > >> > Thanks >> > Richard. >> > >> > >> > On 12 May 2017 at 17:09, Richard Downer <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > This thread is for discussions related to the release vote. >> > > >> > > I should clarify what we are looking for in a release vote. >> Particularly, >> > > we are looking for people to download,validate, and test the release. >> > > Only if you are satisfied that the artifacts are correct and the >> quality >> > is >> > > high enough, should you make a "+1" vote. Alongside your vote you >> should >> > > list >> > > the checks that you made. >> > > >> > > Here is a good example: http://markmail.org/message/gevsz2pdciraw6jw >> > > >> > > The vote is not simply about "the master branch contains the features >> I >> > > wanted" - >> > > it is about making sure that *these* artifacts are *correct* (e.g. >> they >> > are >> > > not corrupted, hashes and signatures pass) and are of *sufficiently >> high >> > > quality* to be stamped as an official release of The Apache Software >> > > Foundation. >> > > >> > > Why test the artifacts when master is looking good? Here are some >> > reasons: >> > > >> > > - somebody could have made a commit that broke it, since you last git >> > > pulled >> > > - the release branch could have been made at the wrong point, or >> > > inconsistently >> > > between all of the submodules >> > > - something in the release process could have broken it >> > > - I could have made a mistake and corrupted the files >> > > - a problem with the Apache infrastructure could mean that the release >> > > files are >> > > unobtainable or corrupted >> > > >> > > This is why the release manager needs you to download the actual >> release >> > > artifacts and try them out. >> > > >> > > The way Apache works can be a bit arcane sometimes, but it's all done >> > with >> > > a reason. If the vote passes then the contents of the email and its >> links >> > > become "endorsed" by The Apache Software Foundation, and the >> Foundation >> > > will >> > > take on legal liability for them, forever. >> > > >> > > And of course we want the best possible experience for our users - so >> we >> > > need >> > > the actual release files to be tested manually to make sure that a >> > mistake >> > > does >> > > not ruin the experience for users. >> > > >> > > So if you can spare an hour or more to download some of the artifacts >> and >> > > try >> > > them out, then it will be *very* useful! The vote lasts for three >> days so >> > > there's no need to rush to get a vote in. >> > > >> > > Thanks! >> > > Richard Downer >> > > >> > >> > >
