998141 - firefox-beta-latest and firefox-beta-stub on windows, bouncer staging, are 404s

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Release Engineering :: General, defect)

Description

[Stephen Donner [:stephend] Not actively reading bugmail]

As of this regression range:

Failed > Console Output #1068 Apr 17, 2014 9:07:03 AM
Success > Console Output #1067 Apr 17, 2014 7:55:56 AM

the following two URLs/requests no longer work (they 404):

https://download.allizom.org/?lang=en-US&product=firefox-beta-latest&os=win
https://download.allizom.org/?lang=en-US&product=firefox-beta-stub&os=win

Comment 1

[Aki Sasaki (not active)]

Due to timing, I'm wondering if Ben's staging release affected this:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=978751#c3

Comment 2

[Rail Aliiev [:rail]]

Yeah, looks like our staging beta1 release automation tests.

:stephend, how critical is the staging bouncer environment? Releng needs to use it to test our automation what means that some stuff may be broken from time to time.

Comment 3

[Stephen Donner [:stephend] Not actively reading bugmail]

(In reply to Rail Aliiev [:rail] from comment #2)
> Yeah, looks like our staging beta1 release automation tests.
> 
> :stephend, how critical is the staging bouncer environment? Releng needs to
> use it to test our automation what means that some stuff may be broken from
> time to time.

AFAIK, it's a pure testing environment, both for straight-up Mozilla.org changes as well as Bouncer changes (rhelmer can confirm); the tests we have running alert only Web QA, at present, so as long as we get a heads-up, no worries about false alarms.

Comment 4

[Robert Helmer [:rhelmer]]

(In reply to Stephen Donner [:stephend] from comment #3)
> (In reply to Rail Aliiev [:rail] from comment #2)
> > Yeah, looks like our staging beta1 release automation tests.
> > 
> > :stephend, how critical is the staging bouncer environment? Releng needs to
> > use it to test our automation what means that some stuff may be broken from
> > time to time.
> 
> AFAIK, it's a pure testing environment, both for straight-up Mozilla.org
> changes as well as Bouncer changes (rhelmer can confirm); the tests we have
> running alert only Web QA, at present, so as long as we get a heads-up, no
> worries about false alarms.

Stage has been busted since I've started recently working on tuxedo/bouncer, we just fixed it the other day so releng can make changes via the API again which is why I think this is coming up now.

We may want to have a separate environment for WebQA's use that has data mirrored from prod, where they can test the code in isolation.

Comment 5

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

(In reply to Robert Helmer [:rhelmer] from comment #4)
> (In reply to Stephen Donner [:stephend] from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Rail Aliiev [:rail] from comment #2)
> > > Yeah, looks like our staging beta1 release automation tests.
> > > 
> > > :stephend, how critical is the staging bouncer environment? Releng needs to
> > > use it to test our automation what means that some stuff may be broken from
> > > time to time.
> > 
> > AFAIK, it's a pure testing environment, both for straight-up Mozilla.org
> > changes as well as Bouncer changes (rhelmer can confirm); the tests we have
> > running alert only Web QA, at present, so as long as we get a heads-up, no
> > worries about false alarms.
> 
> Stage has been busted since I've started recently working on tuxedo/bouncer,
> we just fixed it the other day so releng can make changes via the API again
> which is why I think this is coming up now.
> 
> We may want to have a separate environment for WebQA's use that has data
> mirrored from prod, where they can test the code in isolation.

Do we have a dev bouncer/tuxedo? If so, that seems like what RelEng should be using rather than stage.

Comment 6

[Robert Helmer [:rhelmer]]

(In reply to Ben Hearsum [:bhearsum] from comment #5)
> (In reply to Robert Helmer [:rhelmer] from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Stephen Donner [:stephend] from comment #3)
> > > (In reply to Rail Aliiev [:rail] from comment #2)
> > > > Yeah, looks like our staging beta1 release automation tests.
> > > > 
> > > > :stephend, how critical is the staging bouncer environment? Releng needs to
> > > > use it to test our automation what means that some stuff may be broken from
> > > > time to time.
> > > 
> > > AFAIK, it's a pure testing environment, both for straight-up Mozilla.org
> > > changes as well as Bouncer changes (rhelmer can confirm); the tests we have
> > > running alert only Web QA, at present, so as long as we get a heads-up, no
> > > worries about false alarms.
> > 
> > Stage has been busted since I've started recently working on tuxedo/bouncer,
> > we just fixed it the other day so releng can make changes via the API again
> > which is why I think this is coming up now.
> > 
> > We may want to have a separate environment for WebQA's use that has data
> > mirrored from prod, where they can test the code in isolation.
> 
> Do we have a dev bouncer/tuxedo? If so, that seems like what RelEng should
> be using rather than stage.

We do: https://bounceradmin-dev.allizom.org / https://download-dev.allizom.org/

Comment 7

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

I filed bug 998985 to get us using for our "staging" releases (which are really dev releases). Anything else we should be doing here?

Comment 8

[Robert Helmer [:rhelmer]]

(In reply to Ben Hearsum [:bhearsum] from comment #7)
> I filed bug 998985 to get us using for our "staging" releases (which are
> really dev releases). Anything else we should be doing here?

sgtm!

Comment 9

[Robert Helmer [:rhelmer]]

(In reply to Stephen Donner [:stephend] from comment #0)
> As of this regression range:
> 
> Failed > Console Output #1068 Apr 17, 2014 9:07:03 AM
> Success > Console Output #1067 Apr 17, 2014 7:55:56 AM
> 
> the following two URLs/requests no longer work (they 404):
> 
> https://download.allizom.org/?lang=en-US&product=firefox-beta-latest&os=win
> https://download.allizom.org/?lang=en-US&product=firefox-beta-stub&os=win

BTW these should both work now ^ Looks like stage was using "product aliases" that were pointing to products that no longer exist in the stage DB, and dev had these set up as "products" instead which is why it's working there.

In fact product aliases isn't working at all on dev (filed bug 1000330).

Also, after discussion in IRC, I think it'd help for QA purposes to automatically sync the prod DB to stage, filed bug 1000332 for that.

Comment 10

[Matt Brandt [:mbrandt]]

> I think it'd help for QA purposes to automatically sync the prod DB to stage [ bug 1000332 ]

Many thanks rhelmer, Bumping to verified