[ic] Verisign, double, tripe charges, orders not going through IC

[Ron Phipps]

> From: interchange-users-admin@interchange.redhat.com
[mailto:interchange-
> users-admin@interchange.redhat.com] On Behalf Of mheins@redhat.com
>
> Quoting Ron Phipps (rphipps@reliant-solutions.com):
> >I did not update Perl or any of the modules when I installed 4.8.1.
The
> >server was running 4.6.1 previously.  What does the '>>' operator do?
> >We are running Perl 5.00503, would you recommend that we upgrade if
we
> >attempt 4.8.2?  Any ideas why ENOMEM would be occurring when there is
> >plenty of memory and swap space?  It appears that this happens for
any
> >process that IC spawns whether it is Verisign, PGP or Sendmail.
> 
> [snip]
> > In the last two days I had tried everything besides PreFork, not
sure
> > why I didn't think of that.  Here is the list of major things I
changed:
> >
> > 1. Downgrade from Verisign v3 to v2
> > 2. Downgrade from PGP 6.5.8 to 6.5.2
> > 3. Switch the IC Verisign module from Vend:Payment:Signio to
> > globalsub/signio
> > 4. Install another 256mb of ram.
> 
> I am afraid I don't think of things often in the sense of downgrading
> to make things work.

I think the reason why I went this direction was because we were dealing
with a live system and I had been up for 2 days straight trying to
gather enough evidence and to come up with solutions.  It was extremely
difficult because each time that I tested a solution on the test box it
would work and then we would wait for orders to come through on the live
site and it would break again.  A combination of pressure from the
client and running out of ideas forced me to go to the downgrade route,
which I really did not want to do.

> I am a bit disappointed in the (well-intentioned, I am sure)
> finger-pointing toward IC, though, given your apparent old Perl and
> Linux. You would be well-advised to update to Perl 5.6.0 -- the latest
> stable Perl is always assumed if you don't mention it. I am surprised
> that it is the first I noticed that, and am surprised that you would
> deploy a system with a two-year-old-plus Perl. If you are using a
> two-year-old Linux kernel as well I would advise updating that as
well.

I apologize for the finger pointing Mike.  I'm aware that other things
can cause problems on the system since the site depends on so many
different modules to perform its functions.  It is definitely my fault
for not realizing to update the Perl to the latest and greatest as a
precaution to installing a new system which relies on Perl.  We have had
this site deployed for a year now and it has been rock solid from 4.0 ->
4.6.1 despite the old perl. 

> Remember all bugs are not Interchange. 8-\ If you didn't know,
> thousands of bugs have been fixed in Perl and Linux in the last two
> years.

I know this :)  And once again I apologize if you took my message as an
attack on IC.  You know that I'm very thankful for the software that you
have provided and do not take it for granted.  I got tied up in the
moment of finding a quick fix instead of looking at the situation from
further away.  Those things happen when a launch goes bad and sales are
being lost ;)


> The fact that the problem only appears at busy times means it can
> be anything, and that it is less likely to be Interchange than it
> is overall system.

Point noted, we will be testing and deploying the new perl and will then
readdress IC 4.8.x and see if the problem is tied to the old perl.  I
have watched the load averages and memory usage when the problem occurs
and it is independent of how busy the site is.

> >
> > Last night I ended up downgrading IC from IC 4.8.1 to 4.6.1 and the
> > server has processed 7 orders without the problem occurring.  The
only
> > change I needed to make for the catalog to work correctly was to
remove
> > a nested [if][else]. The true test will be this evening when orders
are
> > concurrent.
> >
> > Since we did not see these issues in the test server I'm leery to
> > upgrade the server again at this point.  I'll talk with the client
and
> > we'll figure out which route he would like to take.  He was excited
to
> > see the speed enhancements for PreFork, but I wanted to verify the
cart
> > worked in the same mode before changing the server level variables.
> >
> > Mike let me know if you are interested in looking into this more.
This
> > is probably beyond my knowledge and would rather keep the client at
> > 4.6.1 until we need a feature in the new IC.
> >
> 
> Sorry, that I cannot do, as I am not allowed to consult directly. I am
> still
> convinced it is not 4.8.1 that is causing the problem, but I don't
know
> what to tell you besides doublecheck your resources (i.e. no error
> messages in /var/log/messages).

If you are convinced it's not a 4.8.1 issue then I'm convinced as well.
It appears to be a combination of environment issues that we will need
to review before attempting the upgrade again.

I hope you see my true intentions (to resolve the situation quickly) and
look over my frustration which was expressed in my message.

Thanks,
-Ron