ant-ivy-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Goblirsch <>
Subject Re: Ivy + hudson CI - problems downloading artifacts, please, help
Date Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:15:26 GMT
Maarten Coene wrote:
> Could you confirm that your Ivy cache isn't accessed concurrently?
> And if your Ivy cache is accessed by more than 1 Ivy process at a time, could you check
you did enable the artifact locking in your settings.xml?
> Cfr.
> Maarten

My experience with this is this. We resolve "compile" dependencies in 
one ant target, and then resolve "test" dependencies in another
ant target. If the artifact-lock is "turned on" in the settings file, 
then the resolving of the "test" conf deadlocks and the ant build process
just hangs.
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: "" <>
> To:; Eugene Sajine <>
> Sent: Wed, February 24, 2010 5:37:48 PM
> Subject: Ivy + hudson CI - problems downloading artifacts, please, help
> Hi,
> I'm not subscribed to the list, so, please, make sure you have my address in CC for replies.
> We are having more than 150 projects in hudson CI with dependencies tracked by Ivy (2.1.0).
> Lately we are having more and more problems with it because ivy cannot copy/download
artifacts correctly.
> There are two main errors we are getting:
> 1. size of source file differs from the size of dest file
> 2. impossible to move part file to definitive one
> In mailing list i found this answer from Xavier Hanin:
> When Ivy downloads ivy files from a repository, it first download them to a
> temporary file (used to be in temp directory until 2.0 beta 1, where the ivy
> file is downloaded to the cache). Then it moves the temporary file to the
> final location in the cache, and this is what seems to be failing for your
> user. Cleaning the cache should fix the problem, if it happens frequently
> you should try to investigate the issue. Maybe it is due to the use of the
> same cache by multiple processes concurrently. This use case is supported
> only with 2.0 beta 1, with the repository cache locking to avoid such
> concurrency issues.
> As i mentioned above our version is 2.1.0, but we still have this issue
> I also saw the same problem reported before, but there was no answer
> Thanks,
> Eugene

View raw message