From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: conditions for removing experimental feature marks Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:07:16 +0100 Message-ID: <550A9FD4.2000007@dachary.org> References: <870DE8DBB716524BAE51B2D499EC81E40AA6CEB8@g01jpexmbyt24> <54E1B57F.3070201@dachary.org> <870DE8DBB716524BAE51B2D499EC81E40AA9678C@g01jpexmbyt24> <54FEFEC6.2080904@dachary.org> <870DE8DBB716524BAE51B2D499EC81E40AA9E155@g01jpexmbyt24> <550A77A4.3080709@dachary.org> <870DE8DBB716524BAE51B2D499EC81E40AA9E706@g01jpexmbyt24> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="WaOarV7mur5NBBUwIigXOPlgBnrxo4PTt" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:60805 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752834AbbCSKHX (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2015 06:07:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <870DE8DBB716524BAE51B2D499EC81E40AA9E706@g01jpexmbyt24> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "Miyamae, Takeshi" , "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" Cc: "Shiozawa, Kensuke" , "Nakao, Takanori" , "Kaga, Yoshihiro" , "Kawaguchi, Shotaro" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --WaOarV7mur5NBBUwIigXOPlgBnrxo4PTt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 19/03/2015 09:50, Miyamae, Takeshi wrote: > Dear Loic, >=20 > Thank you for your reply, and I mostly understand what you meant about = commit policy. > By the way, may I ask a question about the hammer releases ? > Are these two releases, > 1. "We are very close to the release" you commented in pull request #40= 83 > and > 2. "backported later to hammer for the next point release" you mentione= d below, > different ? Hopefully the following will illustrate what I meant : http://ceph.com/do= cs/master/releases/ In a short while the "Hammer" release will be publish= ed. In the same way the Firefly was released back in May 2014. You can se= e that after Firefly was released, "point releases" were published (0.80.= 1, 0.80.2 etc.) on a regular basis. They include bug fixes and sometime o= ptimizations that make a significant difference for people running the st= able release in production.=20 I think the performance improvement you proposed is a good candidate to b= e published in the next Hammer point release. Please let me know if that's still unclear, I'd be happy to explain. The = release process is being documented and it's a good to verify if it actua= lly is understandable ;-) Cheers >=20 > Best regards, > Takeshi Miyamae >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Loic Dachary [mailto:loic@dachary.org]=20 > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 4:16 PM > To: Miyamae, Takeshi/=E5=AE=AE=E5=89=8D =E5=89=9B; ceph-devel@vger.kern= el.org > Cc: Shiozawa, Kensuke/=E5=A1=A9=E6=B2=A2 =E8=B3=A2=E8=BC=94; Nakao, Tak= anori/=E4=B8=AD=E5=B0=BE =E9=B7=B9=E8=A9=94; Kaga, Yoshihiro/=E5=8A=A0=E8= =B3=80 =E8=8A=B3=E5=AE=8F; Kawaguchi, Shotaro/=E5=B7=9D=E5=8F=A3 =E7=BF=94= =E5=A4=AA=E6=9C=97 > Subject: Re: conditions for removing experimental feature marks >=20 > Hi, >=20 > On 19/03/2015 03:20, Miyamae, Takeshi wrote: >> Dear Loic, >> >> We are struggling with teuthology, but we must commit SHEC's recent=20 >> patches including Intel sse4 optimization into Hammer before that. >=20 > I'd be happy to help, do you have specific questions ? >=20 >> erasure code: fix shec performance/coding style issues #4083 >> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/4083 >=20 > I think we need to split this pull request in three pull requests:=20 >=20 > * the performance optimization can go to master (and backported later t= o hammer for the next point release) > * the bug fix should be against hammer and be backported later to hamme= r > * the coding style cleanup should be against master and preferably afte= r any change that you'd like to backport to hammer because it makes it a = little more difficult to backport code >=20 >> Could you check the above pull request, please ? >> Almost all of the modifications are for SHEC plugin's file except for = >> some other document files. >=20 > Cheers >=20 >> >> Best regards, >> Takeshi Miyamae >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Loic Dachary [mailto:loic@dachary.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:25 PM >> To: Miyamae, Takeshi/=E5=AE=AE=E5=89=8D =E5=89=9B; ceph-devel@vger.ker= nel.org >> Cc: Shiozawa, Kensuke/=E5=A1=A9=E6=B2=A2 =E8=B3=A2=E8=BC=94; Nakao, Ta= kanori/=E4=B8=AD=E5=B0=BE =E9=B7=B9=E8=A9=94; Kaga, Yoshihiro/=E5=8A=A0=E8= =B3=80=20 >> =E8=8A=B3=E5=AE=8F; Kawaguchi, Shotaro/=E5=B7=9D=E5=8F=A3 =E7=BF=94=E5= =A4=AA=E6=9C=97 >> Subject: Re: conditions for removing experimental feature marks >> >> Hi ! >> >> On 10/03/2015 11:35, Miyamae, Takeshi wrote: >>> Dear Loic, >>> >>> I really apologize that our reply is too late. >>> Since removing experimental flag from SHEC at v0.94 is our immediate = >>> hope, we should have started any actions for that earlier. >> >> No worries, it's never too late to do good :-) >> >>> By the way, you mean we must add just the same workaround as 10887=20 >>> for SHEC if our target is Hammer. >>> Is my understanding correct ? >> >> What is needed is integration tests running during a few weeks and sho= wing the plugin behaves well.=20 >> >>>> Running teuthology locally is non trivial, maybe we can provide you = >>>> with access to the community lab so that you can run teuthology=20 >>>> suites against the existing teuthology cluster (i.e. http://pulpito.= ceph.com/). Would you like me to ask ? >>> >>> Thank you for your proposal. >>> It would be greatly helpful if we were allowed to use it ! >> >> Could you please connect to irc.oftc.net#sepia ? This is the IRC chann= el where lab related matters are discussed. We can figure out the details= there.=20 >> >> In the meantime you can try teuthology and write a single test quite e= asily, on your local machine. The tricky part comes where we want to run = suites with large number of jobs. You can adapt the instructions from htt= p://dachary.org/?p=3D2204 to your local environment. All you need really = is the ability to run two virtual machines. >> >> Cheers >> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Takeshi Miyamae >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Loic Dachary [mailto:loic@dachary.org] >>> Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 6:17 PM >>> To: Miyamae, Takeshi/=E5=AE=AE=E5=89=8D =E5=89=9B; ceph-devel@vger.ke= rnel.org >>> Cc: Shiozawa, Kensuke/=E5=A1=A9=E6=B2=A2 =E8=B3=A2=E8=BC=94; Nakao, T= akanori/=E4=B8=AD=E5=B0=BE =E9=B7=B9=E8=A9=94 >>> Subject: Re: conditions for removing experimental feature marks >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 16/02/2015 08:37, Miyamae, Takeshi wrote: >>>> Dear Loic, >>>> >>>> Thank you for your help on the pull request of SHEC last week. >>>> We believe that marking experimental feature on SHEC was inevitable = >>>> and the way to restrict the feature is proper. >>>> >>>> By the way, could you let us know what are the conditions for=20 >>>> removing experimental feature marks in the future? >>>> Are additional thorough tests required? >>> >>> The next step is to run integration tests with the shec plugin. The i= ntegration tests have shown that the shec plugin does not disrupt anythin= g. Now we should check if it works properly under stress and upgrades. I = created two tickets for that purpose: >>> >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10886 : integration / theuthology=20 >>> integration / theuthology thrasher tests for the shec erasure code=20 >>> plugin >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10887 : erasure-code: allow upgrades=20 >>> for shec plugins >>> >>> It would be fantastic if you could work on http://tracker.ceph.com/is= sues/7291 : it would make the integration of new erasure code plugins eas= ier. I realize that it is infrastructure work not directly of interest to= the shec plugin implementation. >>> >>> Running teuthology locally is non trivial, maybe we can provide you w= ith access to the community lab so that you can run teuthology suites aga= inst the existing teuthology cluster (i.e. http://pulpito.ceph.com/). Wou= ld you like me to ask ?=20 >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Takeshi Miyamae >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre >>> >>> N r y b X =C7=A7v ^ )=DE=BA{.n + z ]z {ay =1D=CA=87=DA=99= ,j f h z =1E w =20 >> j:+v w j m zZ+ =DD=A2j" !tml=3D >>> >> >> -- >> Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre >> >=20 > -- > Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre >=20 --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --WaOarV7mur5NBBUwIigXOPlgBnrxo4PTt 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) iEYEARECAAYFAlUKn9QACgkQ8dLMyEl6F22DBwCfXwNzMtFzzR3Ox0lJWrUPpXNU gUYAoIvAjDUFM/Kfrn5xesrrcgxmcrPB =65dL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --WaOarV7mur5NBBUwIigXOPlgBnrxo4PTt--