variable used before it is defined about crabserver HOT 7 CLOSED

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

variable used before it is defined

from crabserver.

Comments (7)

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

This test (which makes sure that we do not try to extend a rule created by e.g. WMA) needs to be modified

CRABServer/src/python/TaskWorker/Actions/RucioActions.py

Lines 92 to 98 in 0486eeb

 ruleIdGen = self.rucioClient.list_did_rules(scope=did['scope'], name=did['name']) 

 for rule in ruleIdGen: 

 if rule['account'] == self.rucioAccount: 

 ruleId = rule['id'] 

 break 

 # extend rule lifetime 

 self.rucioClient.update_replication_rule(ruleId, {'lifetime': lifetime})

I thought this was due to the changes I did for introducing an individual quota for tale recall.
In this case a task from avdas was trying to recall same dataset as in an existing rule created for a task by wkwon.
Now recall rules have the user's account name as account, while it was always crab_tape_recall.

But Rucio should not raise "duplicate rule" if account is different :-(

from crabserver.

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

indeed the error came handling task 240812_094541:avdas_crab_20240812_114528
A bit later task 240812_124249:avdas_crab_20240812_144239 was submitted with same dataset as input, and this time it worked.
That dataset is /DYto2L-2Jets_MLL-50_TuneCP5_13p6TeV_amcatnloFXFX-pythia8/Run3Summer22EEDRPremix-124X_mcRun3_2022_realistic_postEE_v1-v4/AODSIM and has only two rules

6e937f42aad448c9b0829bff769188f5 from wmcore_output
761856cd099f48fb8e532d37c5eda3cc from that user advas

from crabserver.

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

I do not understand how we could have got a duplicateException from Rucio before 761856cd099f48fb8e532d37c5eda3cc was created.

So am trying to call this Unreproducible and move on

from crabserver.

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

On Hold until it happens again. Maybe a glitch in Rucio ?

from crabserver.

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

hmm problem is not that rare. It happens every few days and started on Aug 6 (we have logs back to July 12).

twlog.txt.2024-08-06:Problem handling 240806_150852:jbierken_crab_TnP_ntuplizer_muon_Z_Run2022_AOD_Run2022B because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-06:Problem handling 240806_150916:jbierken_crab_TnP_ntuplizer_muon_Z_Run2022_AOD_Run2022C2 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-06:Problem handling 240806_152640:jbierken_crab_TnP_ntuplizer_muon_Z_Run2022_AOD_Run2022B because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-06:Problem handling 240806_152705:jbierken_crab_TnP_ntuplizer_muon_Z_Run2022_AOD_Run2022C2 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-07:Problem handling 240807_112221:jbierken_crab_TnP_ntuplizer_muon_Z_Run2022_AOD_Run2022C2 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-07:Problem handling 240807_153529:aguven_crab_20240807_173507 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-08:Problem handling 240808_073352:avdas_crab_20240808_093334 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-08:Problem handling 240808_093049:jbierken_crab_TnP_ntuplizer_muon_Z_Run2022_AOD_Run2022C2 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-09:Problem handling 240809_153536:pchou_crab_ppref_MC_ZB0_1400v172_HLT_20240808 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-09:Problem handling 240809_153640:pchou_crab_ppref_MC_ZB0_1400v172_noL1_HLT_20240808 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-12:Problem handling 240812_094541:avdas_crab_20240812_114528 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-12:Problem handling 240812_144322:sdansana_crab_HToSS_SmuonHadronFiltered_MH125_MS1p1_ctauS10_2017_20240812164310 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows
twlog.txt.2024-08-16:Problem handling 240816_100136:aguven_crab_20240816_120109 because of local variable 'ruleId' referenced before assignment failure, traceback follows

Deserves more thought

from crabserver.

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

a possibility is to check that the code finds the duplicate rule and if not, raise some more clear error

the other is to assume that Rucio does not check for "same account" and do that checking ourselves

I am still puzzled.
I can start by printing all rules for that DID when we make the check for same account

CRABServer/src/python/TaskWorker/Actions/RucioActions.py

Lines 93 to 96 in 0486eeb

 for rule in ruleIdGen: 

 if rule['account'] == self.rucioAccount: 

 ruleId = rule['id'] 

 break

from crabserver.

belforte commented on September 2, 2024

fixed in #8632

from crabserver.

variable used before it is defined about crabserver HOT 7 CLOSED

Comments (7)

Related Issues (20)

Recommend Projects

React

Vue.js

Typescript

TensorFlow

Django

Laravel

D3

Recommend Topics

javascript

web

server

Machine learning

Visualization

Game

Recommend Org

Facebook

Microsoft

Google

Alibaba

D3

Tencent

	ruleIdGen = self.rucioClient.list_did_rules(scope=did['scope'], name=did['name'])
	for rule in ruleIdGen:
	if rule['account'] == self.rucioAccount:
	ruleId = rule['id']
	break
	# extend rule lifetime
	self.rucioClient.update_replication_rule(ruleId, {'lifetime': lifetime})