1 2 Previous Next 15 Replies Latest reply on Aug 29, 2014 11:16 AM by Yanick Girouard

    RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing

    richard mcleod

      Using offline mode I continually receive the below error -- Note that the initial update job was able to add 13784 patches successfully but failed with the same error shown below

       

      ErrorJul 24, 2014 1:16:16 PMError while add/update patch in depot: rpm : conrep-3.30-1.x86_64.rpm, , Error: java.sql.BatchUpdateException: String or binary data would be truncated. (Caused By: String or binary data would be truncated.)

       

      Where can I look for more log details on this??

        • 2. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
          richard mcleod

          Unfortunately its been rolled off, re-running now to try to capture from appserver

          • 3. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
            richard mcleod

            From job log

             

             

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:48,425] [WorkItem-Thread-14] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [Patch-Metadata-Updator] Notifying all depot object batches..

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:51,514] [WorkItem-Thread-11] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Executing work item Depot Object Processor WorkItem (batch 1) on application server: aap02_job_3

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,277] [WorkItem-Thread-11] [ERROR] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] [JNI] rsc_dircontents error: 19

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,293] [WorkItem-Thread-11] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] SQLException: Sql State (22001) Vendor Code (8152)

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,729] [WorkItem-Thread-11] [ERROR] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Error while add/update patch in depot: rpm : conrep-3.30-1.x86_64.rpm,

            , Error: java.sql.BatchUpdateException: String or binary data would be truncated. (Caused By: String or binary data would be truncated.)

            com.bladelogic.om.infra.mfw.util.BlException: java.sql.BatchUpdateException: String or binary data would be truncated.

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.db.TransactionalOperation.execute(TransactionalOperation.java:145)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.patch.model.job.catalogUpdate.DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.saveDepotObject(DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.java:467)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.patch.model.job.catalogUpdate.DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.addDepotObject(DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.java:397)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.patch.model.job.catalogUpdate.DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.processDepotObject(DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.java:758)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.patch.model.job.catalogUpdate.DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.execute(DepotObjectProcessorWorkItemImpl.java:202)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.workitem.WorkItem.doExecute(WorkItem.java:127)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.workitem.thread.WorkItemThread.execute(WorkItemThread.java:176)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.workitem.thread.WorkItemThread.execute(WorkItemThread.java:51)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.thread.BlBlockingThread.run(BlBlockingThread.java:95)

            Caused by: java.sql.BatchUpdateException: String or binary data would be truncated.

                    at com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerPreparedStatement.executeBatch(SQLServerPreparedStatement.java:1160)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.shared.db.BlPreparedStatement.executeBatch(BlPreparedStatement.java:254)

                    at org.apache.commons.dbcp.DelegatingStatement.executeBatch(DelegatingStatement.java:297)

                    at org.apache.commons.dbcp.DelegatingStatement.executeBatch(DelegatingStatement.java:297)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.db.DefaultDatabaseServiceImpl.executeBatch(DefaultDatabaseServiceImpl.java:898)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.db.DefaultDatabaseServiceImpl.executeBatch(DefaultDatabaseServiceImpl.java:844)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.db.UserTransactionImpl.flushInserts(UserTransactionImpl.java:242)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.db.UserTransactionImpl.commit(UserTransactionImpl.java:127)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.service.session.SessionImpl.commitUserTransaction(SessionImpl.java:352)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.db.TransactionalOperation.manageTransaction(TransactionalOperation.java:175)

                    at com.bladelogic.om.infra.app.db.TransactionalOperation.execute(TransactionalOperation.java:136)

                    ... 8 more

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,729] [WorkItem-Thread-11] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Catalog update progress is 89% completed. Processing Depot batch 1 : 1/1

            completed.

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,729] [Job-Execution-12] [ERROR] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Error found while running job skipping Errata objects adding process.

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,729] [Job-Execution-12] [ERROR] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Error found while running job skipping Errata objects adding process.

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Patches newly added: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Patches updated: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Patches obsoleted: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Patches failed to be process: 1

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Patches copied from source: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Patches failed to be copied from source: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Referrers newly added: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Referrers updated: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Referrers obsoleted: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,761] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Referrers failed to be process: 0

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:53,870] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Creating the ISystem object for the host:rhnsat and the root dir:/var/satellite/bladelogic/rhel6u4

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:54,962] [Job-Execution-12] [INFO] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] Catalog update progress is completed.

            [28 Jul 2014 15:16:54,962] [Job-Execution-12] [ERROR] [mememe8@thedomain.com:role:] [CatalogUpdate] The job 'RHEL 6.4_CUJ-2014-07-23 14-47-58-088-0400' has failed

            • 4. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
              Yanick Girouard

              What is this package anyway? conrep is not provided by Red Hat ?

               

              If you can locate this package, can you run the rpm -qip command against it and paste the info here? I suspect the description field might be too long or something like that... The rpm_summary field in the depot_software_rpm table has a max length of 512 characters.

              • 5. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                richard mcleod

                conrep is an HP package. Must be the summary, here's the output

                 

                rpm -qip conrep-3.30-1.x86_64.rpm

                Name        : conrep                       Relocations: (not relocatable)

                Version     : 3.30                              Vendor: (none)

                Release     : 1                             Build Date: Mon Mar 14 17:06:39 2011

                Install Date: (not installed)               Build Host: rhel5.lab.home

                Group       : Applications/System           Source RPM: conrep-3.30-1.src.rpm

                Size        : 160967                           License: Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.

                Signature   : (none)

                Summary     : THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE

                Description :

                CONREP uses an XML definition file to  determine  what  information  to

                retrieve  from and restore to theserver.  This file can be easily modi-

                fied to update new features or restrict features when capturing config-

                urations.

                 

                 

                WARNING Improper  modification  of the CONREP data files can result in the

                loss of critical data.  Only  experienced  users  of  the  Toolkit

                should  attempt to modify the data files. Because of the potential

                risk of data loss, take all necessary precautions to  ensure  that

                mission-critical systems remain online if a failure occurs.

                • 6. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                  Yanick Girouard

                  The summary is more than 512 characters long, so this is why the error comes up. Usually, the summary string is a short one-liner, not a paragraph such as this. See here: Tags: Data Definitions

                   

                  The question however is where is the offline catalog downloader getting this from because this is not available in Red Hat channels ?

                  • 7. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing

                    Conrep is a HP utility to replicate/backup/restore the configurable BIOS settings of a ProLiant server. It can be used to save manually configured BIOS settings on a prototype server and then replicate them on a number of other servers of the same model as part of automated provisioning.

                    BSA catalogue maintenance and patch analysis really needs to stop choking on RPMs just because they didn't come from its favorite (hardcoded) RHN channel.

                    • 8. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                      Yanick Girouard

                      I assume the conrep RPM is coming from one of these channels? http://downloads.linux.hp.com/SDR/project/stk/

                       

                      The point is that the metadata of the RPM is loaded in the database of BSA so it can be seen when looking at the RPM depot object properties. BMC can't be held accountable if a vendor can't follow best practices and guidelines for RPM tag length. The summary tag is supposed to be a single line, not a block of text! The current BSA database field length for this tag is 512 characters, which should be more than enough for any RPM. This one is an exception.

                       

                      BSA is also officially supporting only Red Hat channels for Red Hat Patch Catalogs. The RPM object class was made and tested in function of those RPMs. If another 3rd party channel causes problems because the metadata of their RPM is too long, they (the owners of that channel) should be notified.

                       

                      I guess BMC could extend the length of the RPM summary field, but there could be other impacts in doing so. You can always submit an Idea for it, but I doubt it would be considered a defect.

                      • 9. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                        richard mcleod

                        Yanick Girouard - Thanks for that info! We rebuilt the rpm and chopped out the Summary and Description and moved it into the repo. I manually edited the XML to point to the new rpm and ran the update patch catalog job. Great Success!

                        • 10. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                          Yanick Girouard

                          Good stuff ! Glad you were able to fix it that way.

                          • 11. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing

                            If an RPM package violates a limit codified in a specification of the RPM format then yes, Bladelogic would have an excuse for choking on it as that would make it a malformed RPM.  It would be nice if it didn't choke, but understandable if it did.  The preferable option would be to identify and gracefully report the exact nature and root cause of the problem and then fail.

                             

                            If an RPM package isn't malformed as such and merely overloads/abuses some fields or defies best practice without technically violating any standards-imposed constraints of the binary format, and especially if native RPM tools and libraries of the target platform see no problem with it, then I'd say the problem lies with the tool, not the package.

                             

                            This of course doesn't justify or excuse any deficiencies of vendor RPM packaging practices, it says only that for BSA to truly be an Enterprise-quality tool, it should exhibit a degree of robustness in the face of third party product failures as long as these products do not comprise a part of its core infrastructure.  It should also exhibit more graceful modes of failure.

                            • 12. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                              Bill Robinson

                              Ok, so is there a support ticket open for this?  a defect for this problem ?

                              • 13. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                                richard mcleod

                                This was opened ISS04336722 (now closed)

                                • 14. Re: RHEL6 Patch Catalog Update failing
                                  Bill Robinson

                                  Ok, we made this: https://communities.bmc.com/ideas/7341 apparently to track this.

                                  1 2 Previous Next