Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FilestoreIntegrity plugin ignores different binarystore data directories #205

Closed
patbat95008 opened this issue Apr 11, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed
Labels
type: feature request New feature or request

Comments

@patbat95008
Copy link

Symptoms:
When running the filestoreIntegrity plugin execution endpoint, the plugin will only look in the local Artifactory data directory, unless a different one is specified in an HA configuration. This results in unintended errors, such as reporting all Artifactory binaries are missing.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Move a healthy Artifactory filestore to a simulated mount in a different location
  2. Modify the Binarystore.xml as per the documentation to point to the "NFS mount" alternate location
  3. Load the plugin,
  4. Either see an incorrect assessment (If the "filestore" directory still exists) or a 500 error:
    {
    "errors" : [ {
    "status" : 500,
    "message" : "Error reading files from '/home/jfrog/programs/artifactory-pro-5.2.1/data/filestore': the directory is either empty, inaccessible, or gone. This Artifactory instance may be using a binary provider that is unsupported by this plugin."
    } ]
    }

Workaround: Symlink the $ARTIFACTORY_HOME/data/filestore folder to point to the actual filestore mount.

@DarthFennec
Copy link
Contributor

Suggested workaround looks good. Short term fix would be to find a way to extract the real directory location from the binarystore config.

Long term fix is to use Artifactory's internal binarystore API. This wouldn't be much slower for local storage, and it would work with all other filestores (sharding, S3, etc), which would make that horrible python script mostly obsolete.

@arturo-aparicio arturo-aparicio added the type: feature request New feature or request label Nov 5, 2020
@arturo-aparicio
Copy link
Contributor

Marking this as a feature request. We already document this limitation with the tool and provide an alternative method. If we take this up, we should also account for other scenarios and do something reasonable:
S3, Sharding, custer storage, etc.

@shashank-jfrog
Copy link

Hi

The above issue is a known limitation to the plugin and the suggested solution is here. As this is a deprecated plugin and we are not taking feature requests. As you can see in our documentation we are working on a newer, recommended way to extend the JFrog Platform (including artifactory) in a cloud-native way, called JFrog Workers.

We’ll close this ticket for now, but if you have any further questions or need additional assistance, don’t hesitate to reopen it.

Thanks

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: feature request New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants