Scheduled Scrub not running

@magicalyak it would appear from your logs:

That you have not re-created your scrub tasks post 3.9.1-2 release (see later) ie from my first comment in this thread here and my first too yourself in this thread :face_with_raised_eyebrow::

ie the url for your logged tasks is using the pool name where as from the end of the last testing release (last stable) and all throughout the current testing channel release cycle we have been using the db id of a pool not it’s name in the API calls. And more specifically the second testing channel update released in the current testing channel, 3.9.1-2:

ie:

scripts.scheduled_tasks.pool_scrub - update_state constructs url=pools/2/scrub/status

and then uses that to query the scrub state.

Sorry I should have double checked that you were on a relevant release and I obviously made a misleading mistake in my post:

Silly me.

I was thinking that the number indicated the pool but of course as per my post to @peter:

So for my example here:

cat /etc/cron.d/rockstortab 

SHELL=/bin/bash
PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin
MAILTO=root
# These entries are auto generated by Rockstor. Do not edit.
*/5 * * * * root /opt/rockstor-dev//bin/st-pool-scrub 7 \*-*-*-*-*-*

that “7” points to:

psql -U rocky smartdb

select * from smart_manager_taskdefinition;
 id |         name         | task_type |                    json_meta                    | enabled |   crontab   | crontabwindow 
----+----------------------+-----------+-------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+---------------
  7 | luks-on-bcache-scrub | scrub     | {"pool_name": "pool-on-luks-dev", "pool": "2"}  | t       | */5 * * * * | *-*-*-*-*-*
  6 | root-scrub3          | scrub     | {"pool_name": "rockstor_rockstor", "pool": "1"} | f       | */5 * * * * | *-*-*-*-*-*
(2 rows)

Oh well, my mistake; see how you get on after updating to the latest testing release and then deleting and re-creating your scheduled scrubs.

On my side of the updates wagon we now have the following pending pull request awaiting review:

Thanks @magicalyak and I hope the above has sufficiently explained my misunderstanding.