[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-994?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13462236#comment-13462236
]
Robert Kanter commented on OOZIE-994:
-------------------------------------
That's a good idea for the exception loop. Doing that exposed a new issue
though. Suppose you register {{IOException}} and {{RemoteException}} (like in
TestActionExecutor). In the for loop, we check
{{errorInfo.getKey().isInstance(ex)}} but because RemoteException is a subclass
of IOException, this will pass when {{ex}} is a {{RemoteException}} and
{{errrorInfo.getKey()}} is an {{IOException}}, which is not what we want. Do
you know of a good way in Java to get the "strictest" subclass of a class? I
have an idea that might work that I'll try, but its probably not the cleanest
solution.
> ActionCheckXCommand does not handle failures properly
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OOZIE-994
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-994
> Project: Oozie
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: workflow
> Affects Versions: 3.2.0
> Reporter: Alejandro Abdelnur
> Assignee: Robert Kanter
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: trunk
>
> Attachments: OOZIE-994.patch, OOZIE-994.patch, OOZIE-994.patch
>
>
> If the JT restarts or dies and running jobs are lost or the JT is not
> reachable, Oozie ActionCheckXCommand will never fail the workflow job.
> There seem to be 2 issues here:
> * convertException is not receiving the root cause exception anytmore, but
> alway HadoopAccessorException wrapping the root cause exception. We should
> modify the convertException to inspect the cause exception as well.
> * ActionCheckXCommand does not do the handle retry logic of
> ActionStartXCommand.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
