[Bug 2058152] Re: running the daily cron job is VERY slow
I added the new index on 2024-03-12. The cronjob kicks off at 01:00 and you can see that it greatly reduced the time. On 2024-03-09 you can see that the cronjob started at 01:00 completed at 21:00 ... this is the 20 hour run. ** Attachment added: "Screenshot 2024-03-17 12.38.32.png" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/opendmarc/+bug/2058152/+attachment/5756585/+files/Screenshot%202024-03-17%2012.38.32.png -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2058152 Title: running the daily cron job is VERY slow To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/opendmarc/+bug/2058152/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2058152] [NEW] running the daily cron job is VERY slow
Public bug reported: I found that the daily cron job was taking many hours. Once it took 20 hours to complete! In mysql, I added a new index on the `messages` table, on the from_domain column. Now the cronjob takes four minutes, every time it runs. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 20.04 Package: opendmarc 1.3.2-7ubuntu0.1 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.15.0-1055.60~20.04.1-aws 5.15.136 Uname: Linux 5.15.0-1055-aws x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu27.27 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: skip Date: Sun Mar 17 12:42:19 2024 Ec2AMI: ami-063aa838bd7631e0b Ec2AMIManifest: (unknown) Ec2AvailabilityZone: us-west-1b Ec2InstanceType: t3a.large Ec2Kernel: unavailable Ec2Ramdisk: unavailable ProcEnviron: TERM=xterm PATH=(custom, no user) XDG_RUNTIME_DIR= LANG=en_US.utf8 SHELL=/bin/bash SourcePackage: opendmarc UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to focal on 2021-07-10 (981 days ago) mtime.conffile..etc.default.opendmarc: 2022-08-05T08:39:10.606732 mtime.conffile..etc.opendmarc.conf: 2022-12-13T20:42:56.531125 ** Affects: opendmarc (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Tags: amd64 apport-bug ec2-images focal third-party-packages -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2058152 Title: running the daily cron job is VERY slow To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/opendmarc/+bug/2058152/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1935727] [NEW] package xymon-client 4.3.30 failed to install/upgrade: conflicting packages - not installing xymon-client
Public bug reported: I was doing an upgrade from 18.04 to 20.04 and this bug was automatically built by the system. ProblemType: Package DistroRelease: Ubuntu 20.04 Package: xymon-client 4.3.30 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.4.0-1051.53~18.04.1-aws 5.4.119 Uname: Linux 5.4.0-1051-aws x86_64 ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu27.18 Architecture: amd64 CasperMD5CheckResult: skip Date: Fri Jul 9 22:03:21 2021 Ec2AMI: ami-063aa838bd7631e0b Ec2AMIManifest: (unknown) Ec2AvailabilityZone: us-west-1b Ec2InstanceType: t3a.small Ec2Kernel: unavailable Ec2Ramdisk: unavailable ErrorMessage: conflicting packages - not installing xymon-client Python3Details: /usr/bin/python3.8, Python 3.8.10, python3-minimal, 3.8.2-0ubuntu2 PythonDetails: /usr/bin/python2.7, Python 2.7.18, python-is-python2, 2.7.17-4 RelatedPackageVersions: dpkg 1.19.7ubuntu3 apt 2.0.6 SourcePackage: xymon Title: package xymon-client 4.3.30 failed to install/upgrade: conflicting packages - not installing xymon-client UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to focal on 2021-07-10 (0 days ago) ** Affects: xymon (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Tags: amd64 apport-package ec2-images focal -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1935727 Title: package xymon-client 4.3.30 failed to install/upgrade: conflicting packages - not installing xymon-client To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xymon/+bug/1935727/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
The reason that I filed this as a bug is because I have a config that works perfectly on 2.6 kernels that I cannot get working on 3.13 or 4.1 kernels. I figure there are two possible reasons: 1) The feature has become broken and needs to be fixed. 2) Something changed in how the feature works and now it requires a different config. I think it's probably number 1. If it is number 2, then I will need to know the new way of configuring it, and I would expect to file a bug against ldirectord. I'm not sure how to go about it, but if there's a way to load a system with a 2.6.32 kernel, prove that it works right, and then step through each kernel release after that, we could figure out which specific release broke it. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
I have been trying out other solutions in the lab, such as having haproxy (which is also running on these machines) handle the FTP. So far I have not been able to find the right config to make that work. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
Side issue: The username on my Ubuntu account (cz-ubuntu) was not chosen by me, and I'd like to change it. I can't get into the Ubuntu forums with this account. Who do I need to contact for that? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
Additional data point -- I've built temporary production FTP load balancers with CentOS 6, and they work properly. The firewall is disabled here too. Here's the uname -a output of the online machine: Linux lb5 2.6.32-504.16.2.el6.centos.plus.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Apr 22 00:59:31 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
That rc3-vivid kernel doesn't seem to exist. I set up a lab machine, tried it out, and saw the same behavior that I've reported here. Then I installed the 4.1 rc2-vivid kernel package for amd64 and rebooted. It complained about missing firmware for my realtek nics, but networking appears to work just fine. The newer kernel did not help. Linux lb5 4.1.0-040100rc2-generic #201505032335 SMP Mon May 4 03:36:35 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux I also tried enabling UFW on my test machine, putting a config /etc/ufw/applications.d for port 21/tcp (FTP) and allowing that application. That didn't help either. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] [NEW] Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
Public bug reported: I have a setup on CentOS 5 (kernel 2.6.18-128.1.6.el5.centos.plus, ipvsadm v1.24, ldirectord v1.186-ha-2.1.3) that handles this perfectly. I'm migrating because the software on that system is very old. After migrating the config to Ubuntu 14, fully updated with aptitude, only active FTP works. The kernel is 3.13.0-52-generic, ipvsadm is v1.26, and ldirectord is v1.186-ha -- all are installed from Ubuntu packages. root@lb1:~# lsb_release -rd Description:Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS Release:14.04 root@lb1:~# uname -a Linux lb1 3.13.0-52-generic #86-Ubuntu SMP Mon May 4 04:32:59 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Passive FTP, which should be handled by the ip_vs_ftp module, doesn't work properly. The control channel works, but data connections don't establish. The ip_vs_ftp module is loaded from /etc/rc.local and the system has been rebooted a number of times. The ldirectord process is not started by upstart, it is started by pacemaker. The LVS load balancer is being configured by ldirectord. This is the ldirectord config: checktimeout=5 checkinterval=10 negotiatetimeout=20 autoreload=yes logfile=/var/log/ldirectord.log quiescent=no virtual=XX.XXX.XXX.71:21 fallback=127.0.0.1:21 real=10.100.2.61:21 masq 65535 real=10.100.2.60:21 masq 1 service=ftp request=monitortest.txt receive=good login=lbtest passwd=PASSWD scheduler=wrr protocol=tcp checktype=negotiate On both CentOS 5 and Ubuntu 14, the machine has actual public IP addresses on it, and that virtual address is a public IP. The firewall is disabled. ProblemType: Bug DistroRelease: Ubuntu 14.04 Package: linux-image-3.13.0-52-generic 3.13.0-52.86 ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 3.13.0-52.86-generic 3.13.11-ckt18 Uname: Linux 3.13.0-52-generic x86_64 AlsaDevices: total 0 crw-rw 1 root audio 116, 1 May 7 22:02 seq crw-rw 1 root audio 116, 33 May 7 22:02 timer AplayDevices: Error: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'aplay' ApportVersion: 2.14.1-0ubuntu3.10 Architecture: amd64 ArecordDevices: Error: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'arecord' AudioDevicesInUse: Error: command ['fuser', '-v', '/dev/snd/seq', '/dev/snd/timer'] failed with exit code 1: CRDA: Error: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'iw' Date: Fri May 8 09:15:14 2015 HibernationDevice: RESUME=UUID=cbeacb5e-cd21-4b18-a72f-7d6ebaec9c40 IwConfig: lono wireless extensions. em2 no wireless extensions. em1 no wireless extensions. MachineType: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R320 PciMultimedia: ProcEnviron: TERM=xterm PATH=(custom, no user) XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=set LANG=en_US.UTF-8 SHELL=/bin/bash ProcFB: 0 VESA VGA ProcKernelCmdLine: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-3.13.0-52-generic root=UUID=58c5cea9-08d7-41d7-8950-cd1c5ff86cde ro splash quiet vt.handoff=7 RelatedPackageVersions: linux-restricted-modules-3.13.0-52-generic N/A linux-backports-modules-3.13.0-52-generic N/A linux-firmware 1.127.11 RfKill: Error: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'rfkill' SourcePackage: linux UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install) dmi.bios.date: 07/10/2014 dmi.bios.vendor: Dell Inc. dmi.bios.version: 2.3.3 dmi.board.name: 0KM5PX dmi.board.vendor: Dell Inc. dmi.board.version: A02 dmi.chassis.type: 23 dmi.chassis.vendor: Dell Inc. dmi.modalias: dmi:bvnDellInc.:bvr2.3.3:bd07/10/2014:svnDellInc.:pnPowerEdgeR320:pvr:rvnDellInc.:rn0KM5PX:rvrA02:cvnDellInc.:ct23:cvr: dmi.product.name: PowerEdge R320 dmi.sys.vendor: Dell Inc. ** Affects: linux (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: Confirmed ** Tags: amd64 apport-bug trusty -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
I notice that the ip_vs_ftp module is used by nf_nat. Does this mean that FTP mangling cannot happen without the firewall? I really don't want to enable to the Linux firewall ... all of this is behind a Cisco firewall with restrictive ACLs, even though I'm using public IPs on this machine. root@lb1:~# lsmod | grep ftp ip_vs_ftp 13079 0 ip_vs 136629 2 ip_vs_ftp nf_nat 21841 1 ip_vs_ftp If I have to enable the firewall, then I will need help configuring it. In addition to being a load balancer, this machine also serves as a router -- the only way to access the back-end servers, even directly by private IP, is by routing through it. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
I cloned the latest resource-agents repository from github, built a new ldirectord, and started up that copy. No change. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
I grabbed a packet capture on the FTP client of the attempted FTP through LVS. When the client sends the PASV command, it never gets a response. Repeating the packet capture on the machine doing LVS (and capturing both interfaces), I got more info. The FTP server sends the reponse to the PASV command, which the ip_vs_ftp module should mangle (changing to the public IP) and forward to the client ... but it never does. Instead thousands of duplicate ACKs begin traversing the network. I will attach a screenshot of the capture in wireshark. The IP addresses are different than my ldirectord config above ... I had to set up a temporary FTP server and run a different virtual address, because the other FTP servers are using the old machine as their default gateway. ** Attachment added: Screenshot of wireshark showing packet capture on LVS system https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+attachment/4393765/+files/wireshark-on-lb.png -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1453180] Re: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module
Will it be possible to solve this problem without turning on the firewall? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453180 Title: Passive FTP is not handled properly by the ip_vs_ftp module To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1453180/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1394759] [NEW] https health checks by ldirectord fail
Public bug reported: Package: ldirectord Description:Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS Release:14.04 See debian bug 770349. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi- bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=770349 For https health checks to succeed, the verify_hostname option for LWP must be disabled. If an IP address is used for the real server (which as far as I know is recommended), the hostname in the request will not match the name in the SSL certificate. Newer LWP versions will check that these match unless they are told not to. The upstream fix was committed here: https://github.com/mcnewton/resource- agents/commit/68fad38326b7c04efd6434e736e32fe395eafe02 I am awaiting another maintenance window before I can verify that this patch fixes the problem I encountered. ** Affects: resource-agents (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to resource-agents in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1394759 Title: https health checks by ldirectord fail To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resource-agents/+bug/1394759/+subscriptions -- Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs
[Bug 1394759] Re: https health checks by ldirectord fail
I have verified in a lab environment that the patch fixes the I encountered when trying to replace a CentOS 5 load balancer with one running Ubuntu 14. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to resource-agents in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1394759 Title: https health checks by ldirectord fail To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resource-agents/+bug/1394759/+subscriptions -- Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs
[Bug 1394759] [NEW] https health checks by ldirectord fail
Public bug reported: Package: ldirectord Description:Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS Release:14.04 See debian bug 770349. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi- bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=770349 For https health checks to succeed, the verify_hostname option for LWP must be disabled. If an IP address is used for the real server (which as far as I know is recommended), the hostname in the request will not match the name in the SSL certificate. Newer LWP versions will check that these match unless they are told not to. The upstream fix was committed here: https://github.com/mcnewton/resource- agents/commit/68fad38326b7c04efd6434e736e32fe395eafe02 I am awaiting another maintenance window before I can verify that this patch fixes the problem I encountered. ** Affects: resource-agents (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1394759 Title: https health checks by ldirectord fail To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resource-agents/+bug/1394759/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1394759] Re: https health checks by ldirectord fail
I have verified in a lab environment that the patch fixes the I encountered when trying to replace a CentOS 5 load balancer with one running Ubuntu 14. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1394759 Title: https health checks by ldirectord fail To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/resource-agents/+bug/1394759/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
