| Summary: | Hudson is not accessible | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Community | Reporter: | David Williams <david_williams> |
| Component: | CI-Jenkins | Assignee: | Eclipse Webmaster <webmaster> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | blocker | ||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | dennis.huebner, jacek.pospychala, sbouchet, sven.efftinge |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Windows 7 | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 325817 | ||
|
Description
David Williams
FWIW, I did eventually get a "bad gateway" error ... but in this case it wouldn't "go away" just by hitting reload (as it usually does) ... tried a dozen times over 4 to 6 hours. :( got a bad gateway after loooong minutes. moreover, i can ping the server : sbouchet@sbouchet-laptop-HP:~$ ping hudson.eclipse.org PING hudson.eclipse.org (206.191.52.59) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 206.191.52.59: icmp_seq=1 ttl=116 time=150 ms 64 bytes from 206.191.52.59: icmp_seq=2 ttl=116 time=166 ms 64 bytes from 206.191.52.59: icmp_seq=3 ttl=116 time=183 ms 64 bytes from 206.191.52.59: icmp_seq=4 ttl=116 time=149 ms 64 bytes from 206.191.52.59: icmp_seq=5 ttl=116 time=151 ms ^C64 bytes from 206.191.52.59: icmp_seq=6 ttl=116 time=153 ms --- hudson.eclipse.org ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 25811ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 149.643/159.302/183.808/12.349 ms For that reason (MWE, Xpand and Xtext) might not be able to participate in M2. Dennis (our release engineer) wasn't able to do anything the last couple of hours. :-( hudson seems to be back now.. I've just restarted the Hudson master. The slaves seem to have followed along nicely. I don't think Hudson appreciated me rebooting the dev.eclipse.org servers for a new kernel :/ Since its back, I'll close as fixed.
> I don't think Hudson appreciated me rebooting the
> dev.eclipse.org servers for a new kernel :/
I have no idea what this means (how one could effect the other) ... but will suggest perhaps it'd be good to open against Hudson ... if there really is something they may want to do differently, to have a more robust system ... not that it would do us any immediate good ... but I'm assuming we're planning to use this for years to come, and suspect they'd appreciate hearing about "weak points" their users experience.
Thanks.
|