Did the debug output shed any light on the problem? --steve
On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 2:55:22 PM UTC-7, Steve wrote: > > Sorry about the formatting. Note the existing review is associated with > change list 1423088 is RID 9175 which was created before I changed the repo > port and description. > > $ rbt --version > RBTools 0.6.3 > > $ rbt post -d --server https://reviewboard-testcases 1423088 > > >>> Making HTTP GET request to > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/ > >>> Making HTTP POST request to > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/ > >>> Got API Error 204 (HTTP code 409): The change number specified has > already been used > >>> Error data: {u'stat': u'fail', u'review_request': {u'status': > u'discarded', u'blocks': [], u'des > cription': u'Test issue with packet size\n', u'links': {u'diffs': > {u'href': u'https://reviewboard-te > stcases/api/review-requests/9317/diffs/', u'method': u'GET'}, > u'repository': {u'href': u'https://rev > iewboard-testcases/api/repositories/1/', u'method': u'GET', u'title': > u'perforce1666'}, u'changes': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/changes/', u'm > ethod': u'GET'}, u'self': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/', u'me > thod': u'GET'}, u'update': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/', u'm > ethod': u'PUT'}, u'last_update': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/ > last-update/', u'method': u'GET'}, u'reviews': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review- > requests/9317/reviews/', u'method': u'GET'}, u'draft': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api > /review-requests/9317/draft/', u'method': u'GET'}, u'file_attachments': > {u'href': u'https://reviewbo > ard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/file-attachments/', u'method': > u'GET'}, u'submitter': {u'href > ': u'https://reviewboard-testcases/api/users/sallan/', u'method': u'GET', > u'title': u'sallan'}, u'sc > reenshots': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/screenshots/', > u'meth > od': u'GET'}, u'delete': {u'href': u' > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/', u'met > hod': u'DELETE'}}, u'url': u'/r/9317/', u'depends_on': [], u'public': > False, u'target_groups': [], u > 'bugs_closed': [], u'changenum': 1423088, u'target_people': [], > u'testing_done': u'', u'branch': u'' > , u'last_updated': u'2015-06-09T17:02:45Z', u'time_added': > u'2015-06-08T16:00:25Z', u'summary': u'Te > st issue with packet size', u'id': 9317}, u'err': {u'msg': u'The change > number specified has already > been used', u'code': 204}} > >>> Making HTTP GET request to > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/ > >>> Making HTTP PUT request to > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/ > >>> Making HTTP GET request to > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/diffs/ > >>> Making HTTP POST request to > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/diffs/ > >>> Making HTTP GET request to > https://reviewboard-testcases/api/review-requests/9317/draft/ > Review request #9317 posted. > > https://reviewboard-testcases/r/9317/ > https://reviewboard-testcases/r/9317/diff/ > > On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 12:17:45 PM UTC-7, David Trowbridge wrote: >> >> Can you include the --debug output here? >> >> -David >> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:23 AM Steve <seide...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I just tested this with RBTools 0.6.3 and 0.7.3. I ran rbt post with >>> the --debug option. It reports the change list is already in use, which is >>> correct, but rather than updating the old review request it creates a new >>> one. Is it because it thinks it's talking to a different repo? That would >>> surprise me though because the repo ID is the same - just the port and >>> description changed. >>> >>> --Steve >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 7:23:08 AM UTC-7, Steve wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, June 8, 2015 at 3:00:31 PM UTC-7, David Trowbridge wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Steve, >>>>> >>>>> It's pretty hard for us to do support for post-review, since it's >>>>> completely obsolete (and 0.5.2 is pretty old). That said, can you give us >>>>> the output of running post-review with --debug in a case where this >>>>> problem >>>>> is showing up? >>>>> >>>>> BTW, why are you planning to upgrade to 0.6.3 instead of 0.7.3? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'd like to upgrade to 0.7.x but I can't because of Issue 3864. >>>> >>>> >>>> I'll try to test this repo problem with a newer RBTools just to see if >>>> the problem is with RBTools or the server. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> --Steve >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -David >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:36 AM Steve <seide...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I forgot to mention that I restarted memcached on the servers too, >>>>>> but the problem persists. >>>>>> >>>>>> --steve >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, June 8, 2015 at 9:28:21 AM UTC-7, Steve wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We changed our DNS entry for our perforce server over the weekend >>>>>>> which required me to change our port settings in ReviewBoard. I edited >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> repo setting in the RB admin console and changed the name an path like >>>>>>> this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> # Old >>>>>>> Name: oldname:1666 >>>>>>> Path: oldname:1666 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> # New >>>>>>> Name: perforce:1666 >>>>>>> Path: perforce:1666 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The string 'perforce:1666' is what is returned by 'p4 info' as the >>>>>>> 'Server address'. This works fine in the sense that all the old >>>>>>> reviews >>>>>>> show the new perforce port string and the diffs are being properly >>>>>>> displayed. The problem occurs when we try to update a review that was >>>>>>> created prior to the DNS change using post-review. Instead of updating >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> old review, it creates a new one. I've told my users they can get >>>>>>> around >>>>>>> this for the old reviews by adding the -r option to specify the review >>>>>>> board id, but I'd like to understand what I may have done wrong. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We are currently using RBTools 0.5.2 and post-review, but we're >>>>>>> planning to upgrade soon to 0.6.3 and rbt. Our RB version is 1.7.28. >>>>>>> I'll >>>>>>> try to test with the new RBTools, but I have a limited amount of old >>>>>>> reviews that I can play with. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --Steve >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: >>>>>> https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/ >>>>>> Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: >>>>>> https://rbcommons.com/ >>>>>> Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/ >>>>>> --- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "reviewboard" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to reviewboard...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>> Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: >>> https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/ >>> Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: >>> https://rbcommons.com/ >>> Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/ >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "reviewboard" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to reviewboard...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/ Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: https://rbcommons.com/ Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "reviewboard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
