# The form data below was edited by tom_tyler # Perforce Workshop Jobs # # Job: The job name. 'new' generates a sequenced job number. # # Status: Job status; required field. There is no enforced or # promoted workflow for transition of jobs from one # status to another, just a set of job status values # for users to apply as they see fit. Possible values: # # open - Issue is available to be worked on. # # inprogress - Active development is in progress. # # blocked - Issue cannot be implemented for some reason. # # fixed - Fixed, optional status to use before closed. # # closed - Issue has been dealt with definitively. # # punted - Decision made not to address the issue, # possibly not ever. # # suspended - Decision made not to address the issue # in the immediate future, but noting that it may # have some merit and may be revisited later. # # duplicate - Duplicate of another issue that. # # obsolete - The need behind the request has become # overcome by events. # # Project: The project this job is for. Required. # # Severity: [A/B/C] (A is highest) Required. # # ReportedBy The user who created the job. Can be changed. # # ReportedDate: The date the job was created. Automatic. # # ModifiedBy: The user who last modified this job. Automatic. # # ModifiedDate: The date this job was last modified. Automatic. # # OwnedBy: The owner, responsible for doing the job. Optional. # # Description: Description of the job. Required. # # DevNotes: Developer's comments. Optional. Can be used to # explain a status, e.g. for blocked, punted, # obsolete or duplicate jobs. May also provide # additional information such as the earliest release # in which a bug is known to exist. # # Component: Projects may use this optional field to indicate # which component of the project a given job is associated # with. # # For the SDP, the list of components is defined in: # //guest/perforce_software/sdp/tools/components.txt # # Type: Type of job [Bug/Doc/Feature/Problem]. Required. # # Bug: is a problem that is fairly well understood, # e.g. one for which there is a reproduction or clear # articulation of the problem. # # Doc: A Documentation fix. # # Feature: An enhancement request, perhaps adding # a new product features, improving maintainability, # essentially any new software improvement other than # a fix to something broken. # # Problem: a suspected bug, or one without a clear # understanding of exactly what is broken. # # Release: Release in which job is intended to be fixed. Job: SDP-895 Status: open Project: perforce-software-sdp Severity: C ReportedBy: andy_boutte ReportedDate: 2023/04/12 13:19:06 ModifiedBy: tom_tyler ModifiedDate: 2023/05/10 06:46:39 OwnedBy: andy_boutte Description: Enhance the p4d start up procedure to better handle the scenario where corruption is detected in the journal file. The SDP can detect the corruption but all it does is rotate the journal. This leaves p4d functional but it leaves the offline database in a bad state. The next nightly offline checkpoint will fail when attempting to replay the latest journal files to the offline database. I think the SDP should do one of the following: 1) The most ideal situation is if the SDP can detect the corruption to first rotate the journal but then also run live_checkppint. This will get the offline database in a good state so that the next nightly offline checkpoint will succeed. 2) if there is no way to accomplish option #1 I think the SDP should have a configurable (opt in / opt out) to exit when corruption is detected in the journal file. DevNotes: Component: core-unix Type: Feature