Sequence Diagram misplaces Handlers

[cjoergensen]

Symptoms

The Sequence Diagram misplaces the handler boxes in occasions and that results the message to appear out of order.

Who's affected

This update is recommended for all users of ServiceInsight who rely on Sequence Diagram as it draws a more accurate sequence of messages in certain situations.

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen Would you be able to test this on the latest release of 1.5.6? I think this was fixed in 2a06575 and is a duplicate of #560.

[cjoergensen]

Here is the sequence diagram from 1.5.6:

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen Would you be able to send us the ServiceControl database? If you want I can share a folder on Google drive for you to upload it.

[cjoergensen]

sure thing. My email is: cgj(at)seas-nve.dk

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen Email set. Please let me know when you have uploaded it. Thanks.

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen I tried to restore it but it seems to be just too big for Raven Studio to handle. Would you be able to upload the DB folder content as per this page into the Google drive please? That way with a simple file copy, I can restore your state and wouldn't have to go through the import process. Thanks.

Just an update that I tried Raven Smuggler as well...after a few hours it also blew up and failed to restore the database.

[HEskandari]

ping @cjoergensen

[cjoergensen]

Im on vacation, but i will send you the data when im back.

[cjoergensen]

@HEskandari I have uploaded the audit data. Have a look at messageid = 'a3f893de-25e0-4838-8d13-a655009bc7df'

[HEskandari]

I'll have a look over the weekend as I'll be at the NDC conf for the rest of the week.

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen I finally got it up and running. I can see the diagram with that message id. I can see that the Started message was at 2016-08-01T07:27:05.912881Z and the Completed message was processed at 2016-08-01T07:27:10.936081Z.

With the fix you'll still see the two boxes for the Handlers but the order would be fixed.

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen this is the diagram generated with the fix. Does this look right now?

[cjoergensen]

@HEskandari Looks great!

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen I have pushed this out to our staging, do you think you can have a look at this pre-release and see if it works as expected?

[cjoergensen]

@HEskandari Sure thing, but the link is broken...

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen The link works for me, might be a permission thing, see if this direct download link works?

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen any updates? I'm waiting for your final confirmation to release the version, thanks beforehand :)

[cjoergensen]

@HEskandari i keep getting 404 Error page when i click the links.

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen Apologies. Must be a permission thing. I'll upload it to the google drive and send you the link.

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen I have reviewed the updated database. I can see a couple of weird sorting issues in it. I have reopened the issue.

[HEskandari]

@cjoergensen I'm back on this issue. The more I look at it, the more it feels like a time being out of sync between the endpoints. Did you at any point checked if the time between your endpoints are synced, preferably through an NTP service to make sure they will remain in sync?

[HEskandari]

Just to summarize where we're at with this issue - as it has been open for some time - here's the current status:

• The initial discrepancy reported was a bug in ordering of messages in the sequence diagram. That bug was reproduced with the database @cjoergensen provided and was patched. Changes are already merged with the master branch and will be included in the next release.
• When testing with a pre-release on a different database (updated?), we saw another issue.
• We're trying to see if the second issue is potentially a time sync issue, since on the other customer databases I have tested, I haven't seen that behavior.

[adamralph]

Since we are reopening closed bugs on the 1.5.8 milestone due to reverting master to 1.5.7 in #617, this issue has been moved from the 1.5.8 milestone to the Future milestone, to make a distinction.

This may be re-added to the 1.5.8 milestone if we decide to fix it before releasing 1.5.8.

[HEskandari]

Hi @cjoergensen were you able to have another look at this? Should we proceed with releasing the interim bug fix, since the existing PR addresses the original issue you raised?