Arvados: Issueshttps://dev.arvados.org/https://dev.arvados.org/favicon.ico?15576888422024-03-27T16:15:58ZArvados
Redmine Arvados - Task #21633 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216332024-03-27T16:15:58ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21632 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216322024-03-27T16:11:16ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21631 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216312024-03-27T16:11:09ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21630 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216302024-03-27T16:10:40ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21629 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216292024-03-27T16:10:35ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21628 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216282024-03-27T16:10:04ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21627 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216272024-03-27T16:09:47ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21626 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216262024-03-27T16:08:43ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21624 (New): Reviewhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216242024-03-27T16:08:02ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Task #21619 (In Progress): Review 21617-fed-contenthttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/216192024-03-26T14:10:39ZTom Cleggtom@curii.comArvados - Bug #21617 (In Progress): Timeout error reading content from collection on a remote clu...https://dev.arvados.org/issues/216172024-03-25T14:43:50ZTom Cleggtom@curii.com
In a 3-way federation with login cluster z1111:
<ul>
<li>a collection stored on z1111 can be read from z2222 (e.g., workbench.z2222/collections/z1111-4zz18-...)</li>
<li>a collection stored on z2222 cannot be read from z1111 (timeout)</li>
<li>a collection stored on z2222 cannot be read from z3333 (timeout)</li>
</ul>
<p>It looks like the intermediate cluster's keepstore process cannot retrieve the list of keep services from the cluster where the data is stored ("failed to validate remote token") -- this auto-retries in the background for a while, then eventually blockReadRemote gives up.</p>
<p>Manual testing, with jutro/tordo/pirca playing the roles of z1111/z2222/z3333, indicates the same problem existed before and after <a class="issue tracker-2 status-2 priority-4 priority-default parent" title="Feature: Keepstore can stream GET and PUT requests using keep-gateway API (In Progress)" href="https://dev.arvados.org/issues/2960">#2960</a> was merged and deployed to tordo.</p> Arvados - Task #21555 (In Progress): Review 21541-arv-mount-keyerror-rebasehttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/215552024-02-28T17:03:32ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.comArvados - Bug #21541 (In Progress): arv-mount KeyError during cap_cache - Seemingly lost track of...https://dev.arvados.org/issues/215412024-02-26T19:01:27ZBrett Smithbrett.smith@curii.com
<p>User's arv-mount process crashed with this traceback. Afterward trying to list files in the mount root returned EIO.</p>
<pre>2024-02-23 23:36:17 arvados.arvados_fuse[2803055] ERROR: Unhandled exception during FUSE operation
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 327, in catch_exceptions_wrapper
return orig_func(self, *args, **kwargs)
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 570, in lookup
self.inodes.touch(p)
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 276, in touch
self.inode_cache.touch(entry)
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 234, in touch
self.manage(obj)
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 228, in manage
self.cap_cache()
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 212, in cap_cache
self._remove(ent, True)
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 186, in _remove
obj.kernel_invalidate()
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/fusedir.py", line 220, in kernel_invalidate
parent = self.inodes[self.parent_inode]
File "venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/arvados_fuse/__init__.py", line 260, in __getitem__
return self._entries[item]
KeyError: 865
</pre>
<p>This exact same traceback appeared seven times in one second. It's not clear whether that's multiple threads running into the same issue, or the error recurring because of different accesses.</p>
<p>Note this mount is intentionally accessible to multiple users on the host. You can assume there was concurrent access. Unfortunately for the same reason it's hard to know whether a specific operation caused the error.</p> Arvados - Bug #21508 (In Progress): Browser struggles with very large number of input or output p...https://dev.arvados.org/issues/215082024-02-14T15:47:13ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.com
<p>User has a workflow that has 1000s of input parameters (or really one array parameter with 1000s of items).</p>
<p>This is making the browser nearly unusable.</p>
<p>We've addressed this in the collection file browser using FixedSizeList from the react-window package. I think we need to do something similar here.</p>
<p>We did some work on this previously (<a class="issue tracker-1 status-3 priority-4 priority-default closed parent" title="Bug: Process view page slowdown when inputs panel is ON and workflow with several thousands inputs (Resolved)" href="https://dev.arvados.org/issues/20424">#20424</a>) which moved the needle from completely unusable to barely usable. We decided at the time that it was good enough, but we now have users routinely running workflows with 1000s of parameters, so we need to revisit it.</p>
<p>Brett reports:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Similarly, trying to switch the Inputs pane from the list view to the JSON tab causes the page to become unresponsive for about a minute. Chrome prompts the user to force close the tab.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So we should make sure the JSON tab of inputs and outputs also renders in a reasonable amount of time.</p> Arvados - Feature #21448 (In Progress): Reorder and group context menu/toolbarhttps://dev.arvados.org/issues/214482024-02-05T14:51:03ZPeter Amstutzpeter.amstutz@curii.com
<p>Currently the context menu / toolbar is sorted alphabetically in some cases. I think this was done because it is combined from several other menu fragments which are enabled or disabled depending on the user's access. In other cases it doesn't seem to be sorting the options at all -- I think we get menus with the read only and writable options concatenated.</p>
<p>However, the result is that the options are not in any logical order. The options should be grouped by what they do and ordered on an approximate frequency of use, with spacers between groups. There's also instances of inconsistent ordering between the menus and the toolbar.</p>
<p>E.g. the current menu for a Process is</p>
<p>Add to favorites<br />API Details<br />Copy and re-run process<br />Edit Process<br />Move to<br />Open in new tab<br />Outputs<br />Remove<br />Share<br />View Details</p>
<p>I think these options can be put into conceptual groups "get more information", "perform an operation", and "toggle state".</p>
<a name="Possible-ordering-for-the-process-menu"></a>
<h3 >Possible ordering for the process menu<a href="#Possible-ordering-for-the-process-menu" class="wiki-anchor">¶</a></h3>
<p>View details<br />Open in new tab<br />Outputs<br />API details<br />---<br />Edit process<br />Copy and re-run process<br />Move to<br />Remove<br />---<br />Add to favorites<br />Add to public favorites</p>
<a name="Possible-ordering-for-the-project-and-collection-menu"></a>
<h3 >Possible ordering for the project and collection menu<a href="#Possible-ordering-for-the-project-and-collection-menu" class="wiki-anchor">¶</a></h3>
<p>View details<br />Open in new tab<br />Copy to clipboard<br />Open with 3rd party client<br />API details<br />---<br />New project<br />Edit project<br />Share<br />Move to<br />Remove<br />---<br />Freeze project<br />Add to favorites<br />Add to public favorites</p>
<a name="Possible-ordering-for-the-registered-workflow-menu"></a>
<h3 >Possible ordering for the registered workflow menu<a href="#Possible-ordering-for-the-registered-workflow-menu" class="wiki-anchor">¶</a></h3>
<p>View details<br />Open in new tab<br />Copy to clipboard<br />API details<br />---<br />Run workflow<br />Remove</p>
<a name="Other-edits"></a>
<h2 >Other edits<a href="#Other-edits" class="wiki-anchor">¶</a></h2>
<p>Processes have an option to "Share", but that doesn't actually work. That should be removed.</p>
<p>For processes, consider only showing "Edit process" on processes in "Draft" state.</p>
<p>For processes, I think we should consider removing the "Move to" option for the time being because it doesn't completely do what you want (it moves exactly that one process, but it doesn't move any of the child processes, outputs or logs).</p>
<p>"Copy to clipboard" should be "Copy link to clipboard"</p>
<p>We could consider striking "Outputs" as a menu option. There's other ways to get to it.</p>
<a name="Implementation"></a>
<h2 >Implementation<a href="#Implementation" class="wiki-anchor">¶</a></h2>
<p>Perhaps we could have a master list that has every possible option (independently of what it operates on) and the grouping. When building the toolbar or menu for any particular instance (which varies based on the thing selected and the user's level of access) it consults the master list to get a group and relative position for every item. This way, the order is consistent everywhere, and changes to ordering or grouping are reflected anywhere those items appear.</p>