inedo-engineer

Hi @aristo_4359,

Is this all rpm packages or just specific versions of a package? Can you share package names and version on the ones that will not delete?

@aristo_4359 said in RPM Bulk Edit Delete does not work:

Also a suggestion, when user delete package the page ideally stay on same page, instead redirecting to main feed on deleting single package and redirecting to first page when deleting using bulk edit

Thanks for the suggestion. The reason we redirect to the feed page after deleting a single package is because we don't know if the package will still exist (has other versions and/or is a remote package) in that feed. Although it is not trivial to check before we redirect, it could be added. I am going to add this to the list to discuss for ProGet 2026.

Thanks,
Rich

Hi @m-ruf_4197,

Sure thing! I have added ticket PG-3115 to track the feature. It should be released within the next couple of maintenance releases of ProGet.

Thanks,
Rich

Hi @jfullmer_7346 ,

I haven't had a chance to look into more details, but thanks for providing the results of the query.

FYI - the PackageNameIds and PackageVersionIds are designed as a kind of "permanent, read-only record" -- once added they are not deleted or modified. Even if all packages are deleted (i.e. FeedPackageVersions). This is why this the "duplicate name" is such a headache to deal with.

That said, on a quick glance, we can see exactly where the error is coming from: there are duplicate versions (i.e. (ID=563)-v6.5.3 and (ID=562)-v6.5.3). So, when we try to deduplicate (ID=563) and (ID=562) (i.e. winscp and WinSCP), we get the error as expected.

What's not expected is that those versions were not de-duplicated in the earlier pass. My guess is that it's related to winscp being in one feed and WinSCP being in the other -- we tried to be conservative, and keep the de-duplication to packages related to the feed.

I'm thinking we just change that logic to "all packages of the feed type". Anyway, please stay tuned. We'll try to get it in the next maintencne release.

Thanks,
Alana

Hi @wechselberg-nisboerge_3629 ,

This error is the result of a "bad rpm package" (basically one that is compressed using a method we don't support) getting accepted into ProGet. It should have been rejected on load -- if ProGet cannot open a package file due to unsupported compression, then I'm not sure how it would have indexed the package.

You should be able to find which package it is by going to the "packages" tab at the top of the UI; when you click on the rpm package, it will give a similar error.

How did you add this package? What package is it? This is an error we can definitely fix if we can figurer out how you got the unsupported package in there.

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @wechselberg-nisboerge_3629 ,

These specific errors would have no impact on performance, feed loading, nor would they cause ProGet to "break down" in any manner. And rebooting would most definitely not help, since they stem from bad/corrupt data.

One possibility is that you have bad hardware - that causes peculiar and sporadic errors just like these that cannot be reproduced,.

I can only imagine how frustrating this is, but your experience is atypical and without reproduction cases we really don't know how to help. I would focus on trying to reproduce -- if it's indeed "bad data" that you are uploading, it would happen every single time.

Thanks,
Steve

@albert-pender_6390 great news!

And thanks for the heads up, I just updated the docs

Hi @albert-pender_6390 ,

This was renamed to proget, so it would just bew

/usr/local/proget/service/proget upgradedb

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @wechselberg-nisboerge_3629 ,

These messages are all unrelated and seem to stem mostly from a combination of bad/corrupt input data. Honestly I've never seen these errors before, but that's what they all sound like to me.

Are these impacting any actual usage, or are you simply "seeing" them in the Diagnostic Center?

If they are impacting usage, please put together a reproduction case so that you can consistently recreate the problem and we can study it.

Otherwise, if they are jjust "showing up" then you can disregard them. The Diagnostic Center is not intended for "proactive health" checking, just to troubleshoot usage errors. Messages logged there many not be problems at all, especially if users are doing things like uploading bad data.

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @wechselberg-nisboerge_3629,

I'm not sure what I'm looking at in the screenshot, but it's most certainly not a piece of process memory. Based on the string literal, it's likely a compiled library (i.e. DLL) that's invoking methods in that system library; you'd need to study the contents in a hex view look for executable headers if you really wanted to know.

Anyway, when it comes to downloading files, those are streamed directly from disk. In every instance of "corrupt downloads" that we've encountered, it was either due to network errors or hardware failures. And those are equally "impossible" to reproduce and nearly impossible to detect.

I would just try new hardware, that usually does the trick. We see this quite a bit in cloud environments (Azure mostly, but every now and then AWS and GCP).

Thanks,
Steve

Hi @mmaharjan_0067 ,

It sounds like you're on the right track with researching this; your reverse proxy is definitely "breaking things" somehow.

Based on what you wrote, it sounds like your reverse proxy is terminating the request because there's no output from the server after a while. The "no output" is expected, since assembling the upload takes quite some time, and that's likely where the "operation cancelled" would be coming from.

I would look there and see if you can adjust timeouts. As for pgutil, here's the code used to perform the multi-part upload:
https://github.com/Inedo/pgutil/blob/thousand/Inedo.ProGet/AssetDirectories/AssetDirectoryClient.cs#L197

-- Dean