650916 - Bug 542580 is not accessible

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: General, defect)

Description

[(no longer active)]

[16:45:52.315] GET https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=542580 [HTTP/1.1 500 Internal Server Error 99494ms]

I guess it might be too large or something?

Comment 1

[:glob ✱]

looks like massive TinderboxPushlog Robot spam

Comment 2

[David Lawrence [:dkl]]

400 comments of repeated:

7314 ERROR TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | /tests/toolkit/components/satchel/test/test_form_autocomplete.html | Checking menu entry #0 - got undefined, expected "1"
7315 ERROR TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | /tests/toolkit/components/satchel/test/test_form_autocomplete.html | Checking menu entry #1 - got undefined, expected "12"
7316 ERROR TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | /tests/toolkit/components/satchel/test/test_form_autocomplete.html | Checking menu entry #2 - got undefined, expected "123"
7317 ERROR TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | /tests/toolkit/components/satchel/test/test_form_autocomplete.html | Checking menu entry #3 - got undefined, expected "1234"

We may have to get justdave to purge the comments for that bug except for a few of the important ones.

dkl

Comment 3

[(no longer active)]

Ah, is this a known limitation on bugzilla?

Comment 4

[(no longer active)]

I mean, it's pretty bad that a bot could make a bug inaccessible...

Comment 5

[David Lawrence [:dkl]]

This is a limitation in the Bugzilla is not capable of processing that amount of data in a timely way and either causes 500 error or the proxy or client timesout before it completes. We will need either to 1) cull the data down to allow the bug to load or 2) truncate the data as it comes out of the database and provide a link (ajax) that allows for the remaining data to be displayed. With number 2 we could set an acceptable threshhold that displays most comments normally but in these cases will cut off the comments if they will cause errors displaying the bug.

dkl

Comment 6

[(no longer active)]

I'm fine with whatever solution you think is best for bug 542580, provided that you only trim the comments made by tbplbot.

Do you think I should file a Bugzilla bug about this issue though?

Comment 7

[David Lawrence [:dkl]]

After looking a little more at the actual data, each comment from [e-mail] is around 27k in size and 1-5 comments were made daily since 11/14/2010. Is there a bug in the Tinderboxbot code that is stuck looping to this bug in particular. Maybe we should purge the comments and fix the issue on the Tinderbox side?

dkl

Comment 8

[(no longer active)]

(In reply to comment #7)
> After looking a little more at the actual data, each comment from
> [e-mail] is around 27k in size and 1-5 comments were made daily since
> 11/14/2010. Is there a bug in the Tinderboxbot code that is stuck looping to
> this bug in particular. Maybe we should purge the comments and fix the issue on
> the Tinderbox side?

There is no bug per se in the tinderboxbot code.

When a job goes orange on TBPL, people star it with the information about the known problem, if any.  As part of that process, the summary scraped from the failure log is uploaded to bugzilla as a comment.

Now, we can probably cut down the maximum size for that comment, but I don't know what a good value would be.

About this particular bug, you can probably trim down those comments to 1K or so each.

Comment 9

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

Bug 795460 makes TBPL limit bug comments when starring to 100 lines of log summary (most cases will be much less). glob/dkl say that it isn't worth fixing in Bugzilla, given how unlikely such bugs could be created by hand. As such, nothing left to do here (unless we really wanted to delete excessive comments retrospectively), so marking WONTFIX at dkl/glob's request.