sink1
July 8, 2024, 9:12am
1
Hi,
I upgraded the 2.2.0 release from 2.1.0 on RHEL9.
Then I copied my cmdb.conf file back into the /etc/datagerry/cmdb.conf, started datagerry, and got:
Jul 5 14:10:04 uat1 datagerry[2267801]: [2024-07-05 14:10:04][INFO ] --- DATAGERRY starting... (__main__.py)
Jul 5 14:10:04 uat1 datagerry[2267801]: [2024-07-05 14:10:04][INFO ] --- Checking database connection with cmdb.conf data (__main__.py)
Jul 5 14:10:04 uat1 datagerry[2267801]: [2024-07-05 14:10:04][CRITICAL] --- CMDBError: The section Database does not exist! (__main__.py)
Jul 5 14:10:04 uat1 datagerry[2267801]: [2024-07-05 14:10:04][INFO ] --- DATAGERRY stopped! (__main__.py)
This is weird because the cmdb.conf contains the settings:
# ls -l /etc/datagerry/cmdb.conf
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 798 Jul 8 11:11 /etc/datagerry/cmdb.conf
# cat /etc/datagerry/cmdb.conf
[Database]
host = 127.0.0.1
port = 27017
database_name = datagerry
tls=false
[WebServer]
host = 0.0.0.0
port = 4000
[MessageQueueing]
host = 127.0.0.1
port = 5672
username = guest
password = NothingHereToSee
exchange = datagerry.eventbus
connection_attempts = 2
retry_delay = 6
Did the format change between 2.1.0 and 2.2.0?
Hey @sink1
in earlier versions were:
database_name = cmdb
sink1
July 8, 2024, 11:53am
3
Hi,
Our database name did not change.
In 2.1.0 we have a database called datagerry in mongod.
In 2,.2.0 we have a database called datagerry in mongod.
Nothing changed on any of our mongodb databases:
test> show dbs
admin 40.00 KiB
config 72.00 KiB
datagerry 39.38 MiB
local 72.00 KiB
test> use datagerry;
switched to db datagerry
I copied a known working configuration into the 2.2.0 installation that has this:
[Database]
host = 127.0.0.1
port = 27017
database_name = datagerry
tls=false
Or do you mean that Becom have hardcoded the database names into 2.2.0?
I thought it was about the default settings
in section [MessageQueueing] use entry:
use_tls = ...
I’m wondering if this entry is compatible with the configuration:
in section [Database]
tls=false
Hi @sink1 ,
we have not changed anything in the cmdb.conf with the last release, we will have a look at it.
BR Adnan
witt
August 11, 2024, 5:59pm
6
Not sure if its related, but I am getting upgrade failures in the logs with updating via Docker also going from 2.1.0 to 2.2.0
witt
August 13, 2024, 2:11pm
7
And now my database is in read only mode
[2024-08-13 14:13:11][ERROR ] --- Something went wrong during the generation of the updater module.
Error: An empty update path is not valid., full error: {'index': 0, 'code': 56, 'errmsg': 'An empty update path is not valid.'} (__main__.py)
[2024-08-13 14:13:11][WARNING ] --- The update did not go through as expected - Status UpateStatus.ERROR (__main__.py)