-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 146
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
Failing to detect SSDs in copyDir should not be a fatal error. #3653
Failing to detect SSDs in copyDir should not be a fatal error. #3653
Conversation
Pinging @elastic/elastic-agent (Team:Elastic-Agent) |
Not backporting since the original change isn't in 8.11 #3212 |
This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @cmacknz? 🙏
NOTE: |
🌐 Coverage report
|
buildkite test it |
That's a new one |
buildkite test it |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
/test |
|
buildkite test it |
This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏
|
This also affects the install command which is now fixed. |
Document that errors are not fatal.
I moved all uses of |
I am going to force merge this for the same reason as #3623 (comment), the install code is covered by integration tests. |
The migration of the agent CI system to buildkite has resulted in a new pipeline with new Mac workers. On those workers there is a new test failure: https://buildkite.com/elastic/elastic-agent/builds/4344#018b6184-da97-4130-8dcf-60f543c6c94a/103-588
The ghw.Block function failing is from https://github.com/jaypipes/ghw which claims directly in its description:
My guess is that this is a limitation of that library where it is failing to deal with the hardware configuration of the Mac workers here (probably there is some network attached storage through it off).
Regardless of the root cause, this isn't actually a fatal error since we can proceed with the default concurrency level of 1. Especially since this is part of the upgrade process, we should just fall back to a default and attempt the copy and let that fail instead if that is what is going to happen.