On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 4:06 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> wrote: > On 06/22/2010 08:57 AM, Julian Foad wrote: >> Here are some Apache access log entries from one occurrence, with paths >> anonymized and the client Id string (always "SVN/1.6.6 (r40053) >> neon/0.28.3") omitted for brevity: >> [[[ >> 127.0.0.1 - UserK [16/Dec/2009:20:25:17 -0800] >> "MKACTIVITY /svn/RepoJ/!svn/act/ActivityA HTTP/1.1" 201 312 "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserK [16/Dec/2009:23:20:45 -0800] >> "PROPPATCH /svn/RepoJ/!svn/wrk/ActivityA/branches/BranchD/PathG HTTP/1.1" >> 207 582 "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserM [17/Dec/2009:00:12:45 -0800] >> "MERGE /svn/RepoJ/branches/BranchH/PathC HTTP/1.1" 200 953 "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserM [17/Dec/2009:00:12:59 -0800] >> "MERGE /svn/RepoJ/branches/BranchP/PathC HTTP/1.1" 200 965 "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserK [17/Dec/2009:00:21:19 -0800] >> "DELETE /svn/RepoJ/!svn/act/ActivityA HTTP/1.1" 204 - "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserK [17/Dec/2009:00:32:45 -0800] >> "MKACTIVITY /svn/RepoJ/!svn/act/ActivityB HTTP/1.1" 201 312 "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserK [17/Dec/2009:00:39:58 -0800] >> "MERGE /svn/RepoJ/branches/BranchD/PathJ HTTP/1.1" 500 279 "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserK [17/Dec/2009:00:39:59 -0800] >> "PROPPATCH /svn/RepoJ/!svn/wrk/ActivityB/branches/BranchD/PathE HTTP/1.1" >> 207 569 "-" >> 127.0.0.1 - UserK [17/Dec/2009:00:39:59 -0800] >> "MERGE /svn/RepoJ/branches/BranchD/PathJ HTTP/1.1" 500 279 "-" >> ]]] > > This sequence looks weird to me. In Subversion, there's always exactly one > MERGE -- the next-to-last step in a commit (which is begun by a MKACTIVITY > in HTTPv1, a POST in HTTPv2). You've got two MKACTIVITYs, and four MERGEs. > Unless there are more operations that occurred but are just missing from > your report there, that's just weird. > >> and the corresponding error log: >> [[[ >> [Thu Dec 17 00:39:58 2009] [error] [client 127.0.0.1] >> Could not MERGE resource "/svn/RepoJ/!svn/act/ActivityA" into >> "/svn/RepoJ/branches/BranchD/PathJ". [500, #0] >> [Thu Dec 17 00:39:58 2009] [error] [client 127.0.0.1] >> There was a problem opening the transaction specified by this activity. >> [500, #2] >> [Thu Dec 17 00:39:58 2009] [error] [client 127.0.0.1] >> Can't open file '/svn/repos/RepoJ/db/transactions/props': No such file or >> directory [500, #2] >> ]]] >> >> The error appears to match the second-last MERGE in the access log. I >> don't have a copy of the body of the MERGE request in this case. >> >> The error refers to an activity Id that was the subject of the DELETE >> that was logged 18 minutes earlier. A comment from one of our guys >> looking at the logs: "We are seeing 22,600 changes for Activity A and no >> merge at the end (just a DELETE). Then we see about 931 commands for >> Activity B and a MERGE that fails for Activity A." >> >> Is this a case where the client side shouldn't be sending a MERGE at >> this point? Even if that is the primary problem, I'm still interested >> in Subversion's response to this MERGE request. > > Our codebase should definitely not allow a bogus (NULL) txn-id to be > casually transformed in a path. You can commit assertions around those > parts *right now*. > > If no MERGE occurs at the end of a stream of activity modifications, that's > usually means that one of those modifications failed and the client has > bailed on the commit (it then issues the DELETE of the activity as a cleanup > step). Weird that something would then try to MERGE the activity that was > already DELETEd. > > This is not behavior I've seen in Subversion's own codebase -- so maybe just > a rare WANdisco software bug?
Possibly. If we're shoving in bogus commands, that would understandably result in Subversion weirdness. Thanks for double checking the arithmetic! -Hyrum
