Page MenuHomePhabricator

Either undo php->php-1.xx symlink messiness, or automate archiving of old MediaWiki versions
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

In our current file structure in nfs and on the apaches, we have something to the effect of:
/home/wikipedia/common/php

...which is a symlink to:

/home/wikipedia/common/php-1.20wmf1

...as of this writing. We managed to cause site problems today by nuking the old php-1.19 problem, and seem destined to cause the same problem nuking php-1.20wmf1.

Can we either eliminate the need for this symlink, or barring that, automate the archiving process for old MediaWiki source directories?


Version: wmf-deployment
Severity: normal
Whiteboard: incident-report
See Also:
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64748

Details

Reference
bz36363

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Low.Nov 22 2014, 12:22 AM
bzimport added a project: Deployments.
bzimport set Reference to bz36363.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).

(In reply to comment #0)

In our current file structure in nfs and on the apaches, we have something to
the effect of:
/home/wikipedia/common/php

...which is a symlink to:

/home/wikipedia/common/php-1.20wmf1

...as of this writing. We managed to cause site problems today by nuking the
old php-1.19 problem, and seem destined to cause the same problem nuking
php-1.20wmf1.

Can we either eliminate the need for this symlink, or barring that, automate
the archiving process for old MediaWiki source directories?

If the symlink had been updated to point to php-1.20wmf1 (rather than php-1.19), and then pushed at the same point (or the symlink pushed first!), the issues won't have happened

Is there a easy way to find out what actually uses the end results of the php symlink? So it might be easier to kill it off (I know the wikipedia.org welcome mat for one…)

(In reply to comment #2)

Is there a easy way to find out what actually uses the end results of the php
symlink? So it might be easier to kill it off (I know the wikipedia.org
welcome
mat for one…)

I think most of the usages would be more external - rather than stuff generally controlled by normal deployments etc

They might appear in the access logs..

I think this can be closed once bug 64748 has been verified as fixed.

(In reply to Bryan Davis from comment #4)

I think this can be closed once bug 64748 has been verified as fixed.

You closed bug 64748 as FIXED, so I assume that this is also FIXED.