Skip to content
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

TypeError: sequence item 1: expected str instance, NoneType found #62

Open
Miserlou opened this issue Sep 17, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

Comments

@Miserlou
Copy link

data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev Traceback (most recent call last):
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev   File "/home/user/data_refinery_foreman/foreman/main.py", line 304, in retry_hung_processor_jobs
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev     job_status = nomad_client.job.get_job(job.nomad_job_id)["Status"]
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev   File "/usr/local/lib/python3.5/dist-packages/nomad/api/job.py", line 67, in get_job
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev     return self._get(id)
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev   File "/usr/local/lib/python3.5/dist-packages/nomad/api/job.py", line 50, in _get
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev     url = self._requester._endpointBuilder(Job.ENDPOINT, *args)
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev   File "/usr/local/lib/python3.5/dist-packages/nomad/api/base.py", line 25, in _endpointBuilder
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev     u = "/".join(args)
data-refinery-log-group-kurtwheeler-dev log-stream-foreman-kurtwheeler-dev TypeError: sequence item 1: expected str instance, NoneType found

Happens sometimes when Nomad is less-than-available..

@jrxFive
Copy link
Owner

jrxFive commented Sep 18, 2018

Hey @Miserlou, in this case would be expecting a more clear cut exception to be raised? Seems there is good amount of pain so far to justify adding more detailed Exceptions in the library, ill certainly put is a priority if thats the case. Thanks for reporting the issue!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants