We've pushed an experimental fix to https://github.com/peeringdb/django-peeringdb@, which we believe should fix most if not all of the sync issues we have been seeing.

It also fixes the updated and created fields to be in sync with their actual values as they exist in peeringdb, as it related to the issue at hand.

Since this is experimental at this point we have not released it to pip yet, we plan to do so once there has been sufficient testing.

Until then if you want run sync with this fix you will have to pip install django-peeringdb manually from github:

pip uninstall django-peeringdb -y
pip install git+https://github.com/peeringdb/django-peeringdb@

Since this fixes the updated \ created fields it is recommended you start from a fresh database, but in the tests we have done it didn't cause any immediate problems to just do an incremental sync on a 0.2.2 database that has local times in those fields.

Finally i would like to note that this is not the proposed fix from #32 (atomic sync), as that is requiring a complete refactor of the client and not ready for release.


On 20/09/16 20:29, Chris Caputo wrote:
On Tue, 20 Sep 2016, Paul Vlaar wrote:
On 20/9/16 18:02, Martin J. Levy wrote:
Yes. However have you tried powering it off and on again? Seriously ...

   for x in 1 2 3 4 5
      peeringdb sync

... I find it fixes itself somewhat after a few runs. Try it.

Thing is, I am running it every 12 hours already, and once it gets to
this state, it seems to remain screwed.

I've found a fresh sync (delete existing sqlite file), is needed when this
happens.  I have the output go to my inbox so I know when it needs to be
fixed.  I've reported the problem.  See and feel free to add to:


(32 was inspired by: https://github.com/peeringdb/peeringdb/issues/24)

Pdb-tech mailing list

Pdb-tech mailing list

Reply via email to