Host Snapin History Issue (possible)

[Jim Graczyk]

Dev Branch, 1.5.0-RC-9, SVN 6080
Running on CEntOS 7

Description:

I scheduled a deployment for a Host that was also assigned Snapins. I decided I didn’t want one of the Snapins to run, so I canceled one Snapin under Task Management / Active Snapin Tasks . All Snapins were canceled (as I assume is by design since all went in at once they may be treated as one task), but the report doesn’t show them all canceled.

The image below shows the first deployed Snapin In-Progress when the set of Snapins were canceled. The next Snapin (AdminSet) is attributed the cancellation. The remainder show the state they were in when the cancellation occurred. I’m assuming this is in error and the History should show all as Cancelled.

First, is it expected that canceling one Snapin should cause all to be cancelled?

If so, then the history needs so show it.

Thanks,

Jim

[Jim Graczyk]

@jim-graczyk My apologies. Can someone move this to the Development area?

[Tom Elliott]

Cancelling one snapin should not cause all others to cancel. I will take a look at the cancellation code to try to see where the problem is, though it make take a little time.

Only if you cancel the ‘main tasking’ of a snapin task will it cancel all others in the group (or that’s how it should work.) . If the snapins are associated as a part of a deploy task, then cancelling one snapin should not cancel all other snapins in the tasking.

[Jim Graczyk]

@tom-elliott

Tom,

Just so you have all the info -
I was operating under the premise that I could cancel only one of many Snapins scheduled during a full deploy action. This may be a timing issue, but when I canceled the undesired Snapin, the first Snapin in the list was already In-Progress. The no Snapins ran after I canceled one. The Host’s Snapin History shows the 2nd Snapin was canceled, when I actual canceled the 7th.

Jim

[Tom Elliott]

I’m solving this topic for now. @Jim-Graczyk if you are still having the issue, mind creating a new one? I will work on this in the meantime, but I would much prefer a new bug report for the issue (after updating to latest rc of course) .