Future timeout when starting the sandbox with persistence

Questions
1

When I run the sandbox with persistence against a Postgres database I see the following error repeatedly on startup:

INFO: No ledger end found, assuming empty database. Skipping migration.
Exception in thread "main" java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: Futures timed out after [1 minute]
        at scala.concurrent.impl.Promise$DefaultPromise.ready(Promise.scala:255)
        at scala.concurrent.impl.Promise$DefaultPromise.result(Promise.scala:259)
        at scala.concurrent.Await$.$anonfun$result$1(package.scala:215)
        at scala.concurrent.BlockContext$DefaultBlockContext$.blockOn(BlockContext.scala:53)
        at scala.concurrent.Await$.result(package.scala:142)
        at com.daml.resources.ProgramResource.$anonfun$run$1(ProgramResource.scala:40)
        at com.daml.resources.ProgramResource.$anonfun$run$1$adapted(ProgramResource.scala:29)
        at com.daml.logging.LoggingContext$.newLoggingContext(LoggingContext.scala:15)
        at com.daml.resources.ProgramResource.run(ProgramResource.scala:29)

Ultimately, the sandbox seems to start up properly, but should I be worried about those errors?

2
  1. Can you confirm that, as the log suggests, you are running against a pristine database?
  2. What SDK version are you using?
  3. Can you use the same JDBC connection string you are using in another tool and confirm that it works?
3

Yes, it’s freshly created.

v1.0.1

I don’t have a Java program that takes the exact connection string, but using psql with the same parameters I can see that the DB got initialized:

 Schema |                     Name                     | Type  |   Owner
--------+----------------------------------------------+-------+-----------
 public | configuration_entries                        | table | damlonsql
 public | contract_data                                | table | damlonsql
 public | contract_divulgences                         | table | damlonsql
 public | contract_key_maintainers                     | table | damlonsql
 public | contract_keys                                | table | damlonsql
 public | contract_observers                           | table | damlonsql
 public | contract_signatories                         | table | damlonsql
 public | contract_witnesses                           | table | damlonsql
 public | contracts                                    | table | damlonsql
 public | disclosures                                  | table | damlonsql
 public | flyway_schema_history                        | table | damlonsql
 public | ledger_entries                               | table | damlonsql
 public | ledger_flyway_schema_history                 | table | damlonsql
 public | ledger_log                                   | table | damlonsql
 public | ledger_meta                                  | table | damlonsql
 public | ledger_state                                 | table | damlonsql
 public | package_entries                              | table | damlonsql
 public | packages                                     | table | damlonsql
 public | parameters                                   | table | damlonsql
 public | participant_command_completions              | table | damlonsql
 public | participant_command_submissions              | table | damlonsql
 public | participant_event_flat_transaction_witnesses | table | damlonsql
 public | participant_event_witnesses_complement       | table | damlonsql
 public | participant_events                           | table | damlonsql
 public | parties                                      | table | damlonsql
 public | party_entries                                | table | damlonsql

So I’m wondering if those errors are even relevant. I haven’t tried submitting commands against it yet, so can’t say if it actually works.

4

You can probably ignore the error. It was fixed in PR #5564 and will be shipped as part of DAML SDK v1.1.1 (hopefully later today).

3 Likes