From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: Throttle::wait use case clarification Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 01:30:50 +0100 Message-ID: <511052BA.60506@dachary.org> References: <50FBF3A4.4010200@dachary.org> <6AF9B5AC8C404CFBB78E54BA8C7FA1D2@inktank.com> <50FD4635.9040301@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig7135C523A089CAD8015EA059" Return-path: Received: from smtp.dmail.dachary.org ([86.65.39.20]:45741 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751215Ab3BEAaw (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2013 19:30:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Gregory Farnum Cc: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig7135C523A089CAD8015EA059 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 02/05/2013 01:22 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote: > Loic, > Sorry for the delay in getting back to you about these patches. :( I > finally got some time to look over them, and in general it's all good! > I do have some comments, though. >=20 > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Loic Dachary wrote:= >>> Looking through the history of that test (in _reset_max), I think it'= s an accident and we actually want to be waking up the front if the maxim= um increases (or possibly in all cases, in case the front is a very large= request we're going to let through anyway). Want to submit a patch? :) >> :-) Here it is. "make check" does not complain. I've not run teutholog= y + qa-suite though. I figured out how to run teuthology but did not yet = try qa-suite. >> >> http://marc.info/?l=3Dceph-devel&m=3D135877502606311&w=3D4 >=20 > This patch to reverse the conditional is obviously fine. >=20 >>> The other possibility I was trying to investigate is that it had some= thing to do with handling get() requests larger than the max correctly, b= ut I can't find any evidence of that one... >> I've run the Throttle unit tests after uncommenting >> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/34/files#L3R269 >> and commenting out >> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/34/files#L3R266 >> and it passes. >=20 > Regarding these unit tests, I have a few questions which I left on > Github. Can you address them and then give a single pull request which > includes both the Throttle fix and the tests? :) I will, thanks :-) --=20 Lo=EFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --------------enig7135C523A089CAD8015EA059 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlEQUroACgkQ8dLMyEl6F21qUwCbBp7sL3gG+sAR+PAFYNs0TcZA IbkAn0Zo5j+cWrW7vL05LIqaPGTFGaes =b2PL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig7135C523A089CAD8015EA059--