+1 on that. Hides away the ugliness yet more accessible than searching through client logs.
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 5:51 AM, Mark Chu-Carroll <mchucarr...@apache.org> wrote: > I like the proposal from John. Any objections to implementing that? > > -Mark > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 2:23 AM, Joshua Cohen <jco...@twopensource.com> > wrote: > >> Came here to make the same suggestion John makes. What if we present >> friendly error messages to the user, but write stack traces to a log file >> that the user can upload in the event of unexpected/unhandled exceptions. >> IMO the reason for not wanting to rely on users re-running commands with a >> verbose flag to dump a stacktrace is that some errors will be transient and >> not easily repeatable, thus the chance to capture the stack will be lost. >> >> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:30 PM, John Sirois <john.sir...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Drive-by, but this has been on my mind with pants as well: How about the >> > current behavior but add a pill, ie: >> > [ref:232e86a2d] Internal error executing command: 'str' object has no >> > attribute 'err_msg' >> > >> > The full backtrace goes off to a file in the user's home dir somewhere >> and >> > then you can ask them to run a command passing the pill ref to get the >> full >> > error report without worry of re-running some non-idempotent command, >> etc. >> > >> > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > +1 on dumping the stack for unhandled errors as long as they are not >> > > caused by KeyboardInterrupt. That would definitely help >> > > troubleshooting transient errors when --reveal-errors is not a good >> > > option. >> > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 1:19 PM, David McLaughlin < >> da...@dmclaughlin.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > Because we allow things like hooks, I think it's best to err on the >> > side >> > > of >> > > > overly verbose logging by default rather than have to ask client >> users >> > to >> > > > rerun their command with an extra option just to get a stack trace. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Mark Chu-Carroll < >> > mchucarr...@apache.org >> > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> Can someone explain to me why providing an option to show the stack >> > > trace >> > > >> is such a problem? >> > > >> >> > > >> Making our debugging easier shouldn't be an excuse for sloppy >> tooling. >> > > >> Dumping stacks at users because we didn't get our debugging right >> > > shouldn't >> > > >> be acceptable. >> > > >> >> > > >> The specific error here, where we've got a user writing python code >> > in a >> > > >> config file is a special case: we're invoking a python >> interpretation >> > > >> process for the user, and if that crashes, they expect what they'd >> get >> > > by >> > > >> running the python code manually. But in other places, allowing >> people >> > > to >> > > >> request extra information as an option seems like a reasonable >> > > compromise. >> > > >> >> > > >> -Mark >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Kevin Sweeney >> > > <kswee...@twitter.com.invalid >> > > >> > >> > > >> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> > We can do both! I think we should dump a stack trace to the >> console >> > > >> > whenever we have an unhandled error, as we're not going to be able >> > to >> > > >> debug >> > > >> > it otherwise. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > We should also strive not to have *any* unhandled errors, but that >> > > does >> > > >> not >> > > >> > mean putting a catch-all exception handler at root, rather it >> means >> > > >> having >> > > >> > *specific* error messages for expected error conditions. For >> > example, >> > > an >> > > >> > IOError in a method to read a config file might translate to an >> > error >> > > >> > message "Unable to read config file: '%s': %s." % (e.filename, >> > > >> e.strerror) >> > > >> > and a specific exit code. So this might manifest as >> > > >> > >> > > >> > % aurora job create devcluster/web/test/webserver typo.aurora >> > > >> > ERROR: Unable to read config file 'typo.aurora': No such file or >> > > >> directory. >> > > >> > % echo $? >> > > >> > 3 >> > > >> > >> > > >> > If the client code (including the support classes) isn't factored >> to >> > > >> allow >> > > >> > exception handling like this, it needs to be refactored. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Also given that the context of this is AURORA-779 I think it's >> > totally >> > > >> > reasonable to throw a stack trace to someone whose .aurora file >> > > raised an >> > > >> > exception (since they are writing python they should get the tools >> > > needed >> > > >> > to debug python). >> > > >> > >> > > >> > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Mark Chu-Carroll < >> > > >> mchucarr...@apache.org> >> > > >> > wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > As we promote clientv2 and deprecate v1, we've come across some >> > > issues >> > > >> > > involving error handling in the v2 client. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > When there's an unexpected error in clientv1, most of the time, >> it >> > > >> > crashes >> > > >> > > and dumps its stack. Dumping stack is a lousy user experience, >> but >> > > it >> > > >> > > proves the stack dump, which users can then include in a bug >> > report. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > The default behavior in clientv2 doesn't dump stack. Instead, it >> > > >> catches >> > > >> > > the unknown error, and prints out a concise error message, like: >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Internal error executing command: 'str' object has no attribute >> > > >> 'err_msg' >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > There's no stack dump, so when we get an error report, it's >> harder >> > > for >> > > >> us >> > > >> > > to track down the cause of the error. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Clientv2 does provide a command-line option, "--reveal-errors", >> > > which >> > > >> > > allows errors to be propagated and eventually result in a stack >> > > trace. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > So: should we allow the client to dump stack on error? >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -Mark >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > -- >> > > >> > Kevin Sweeney >> > > >> > @kts >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> > >>
