From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: Swift tests failing randomly Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:21:48 +0200 Message-ID: <53E8ED9C.5000601@dachary.org> References: <53E7316D.3090808@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="t1BhQ1M2t8GMhTU4ASB4NtUcxPemae9UQ" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:57521 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752555AbaHKQVz (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:21:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <53E7316D.3090808@dachary.org> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Yehuda Sadeh Cc: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --t1BhQ1M2t8GMhTU4ASB4NtUcxPemae9UQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Yehuda, It looks like increasing the rgw idle timeout makes the problem go away (= https://github.com/ceph/ceph-qa-suite/pull/79 and http://tracker.ceph.co= m/issues/8988 ). It previously was 300 sec which looks like a large value= already. Does this fix / workaround make sense to you ? Cheers On 10/08/2014 10:46, Loic Dachary wrote: > Hi Yehuda, >=20 > In the past few months the swift tests failed randomly and I was unfort= unately unable to figure out why. Here are a few examples: >=20 > http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2014-08-08_12:17:30-upgrade:firefly-x:= stress-split-wip-9025-chunk-remapping-testing-basic-vps/406944 > http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2014-08-08_12:17:30-upgrade:firefly-x:= stress-split-wip-9025-chunk-remapping-testing-basic-vps/406941 > http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2014-08-08_12:17:30-upgrade:firefly-x:= stress-split-wip-9025-chunk-remapping-testing-basic-vps/406946 > http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2014-08-08_12:17:30-upgrade:firefly-x:= stress-split-wip-9025-chunk-remapping-testing-basic-vps/406947 >=20 > and it has happened on every upgrade test run since I can remember. I f= ail to see a pattern and cannot figure out what the real problem is. It w= ould be really great if you could take a look. Even a hunch or a tip woul= d be greatly appreciated :-)=20 >=20 > You can find more context in=20 >=20 > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/8988 > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/8016 > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/7799 >=20 > and discussions at >=20 > http://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-devel/msg19933.html >=20 > Cheers >=20 --=20 Lo=EFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --t1BhQ1M2t8GMhTU4ASB4NtUcxPemae9UQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlPo7Z0ACgkQ8dLMyEl6F22HMQCfSH5MNoVUWmR8TGtxRtf/sV0k d0UAn0RSEBdOfsBNRPyN0RKAgg3apYLK =pe3K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --t1BhQ1M2t8GMhTU4ASB4NtUcxPemae9UQ--