From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: Status update for the last Giant release 0.87.2 Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 11:31:59 +0200 Message-ID: <5517C68F.1020401@dachary.org> References: <55168C18.9060307@dachary.org> <87y4mg2z4s.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="fifpSL6X8pDmkT5DRvorqhvMgnkWlpM7S" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:38353 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751012AbbC2JcF (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Mar 2015 05:32:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87y4mg2z4s.fsf@gmail.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Abhishek L Cc: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --fifpSL6X8pDmkT5DRvorqhvMgnkWlpM7S Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Abhishek, On 29/03/2015 06:42, Abhishek L wrote: >=20 > Loic Dachary writes: >=20 >> Hi Abhishek, >> >> Looking at the last two issues marked as needing backport to giant: >> >> http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph/issues?query_id=3D68 >> >> (this link is at the top of http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-rele= ases/wiki/HOWTO) I'm not sure what to do about http://tracker.ceph.com/is= sues/10643. The problem is that it consistently shows up when testing upg= rades that involve giant. We want to be sure Giant can be upgraded to Ham= mer, therefore we need to keep testing the upgrades at least for a month = or two after Hammer is released to catch border cases. I think issue 1064= 3 needs to be fixed and included in 0.87.2 so that we can have clean upgr= ade tests, otherwise it will mean more work for people watching over the = upgrade suites (I mean Yuri here ;-). And wif 10643 is included we can sq= ueeze http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10153 in as well, I think. >> >> Once this is dealt with and you're done with http://tracker.ceph.com/i= ssues/11259 that you found when running the rgw suite at http://tracker.c= eph.com/issues/11153#rgw, 0.87.2 should be good, from our point of view (= the point of view of backporters) and we can move to the "asking approval= " step of the workflow ( http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11153#Workflow ).= =20 >=20 > For this issue, I haven't been able to find out the cause yet, there > seemed to be only one patch that landed in giant related to quotas, > however the test seemed to have failed even before that. I've updated > the tracker with this. It would be interesting to schedule this test once again to check if it s= hows up consistently or not (see http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-re= leases/wiki/HOWTO_run_integration_and_upgrade_tests#Re-scheduling-failed-= or-dead-jobs-from-an-existing-suite for information about doing that). >> >> What do you think ? >=20 > Overall sounds good.=20 >=20 Cool :-) Cheers --=20 Lo=EFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --fifpSL6X8pDmkT5DRvorqhvMgnkWlpM7S 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) iEYEARECAAYFAlUXxo8ACgkQ8dLMyEl6F20tSgCfd6Nn0W8lYk+KnNDE1rkmDjGr /8sAnjB6NtgISxmngtH8qnr0J/U5qjWA =OSsl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fifpSL6X8pDmkT5DRvorqhvMgnkWlpM7S--