From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: should we prepare to release firefly v0.80.10 ? Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 21:04:36 +0200 Message-ID: <55491444.2040209@dachary.org> References: <55362279.5060105@dachary.org> <55367E8D.1090805@redhat.com> <5537229F.4050501@redhat.com> <55488AA7.5020709@dachary.org> <554912D6.7000204@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7N1kaX51JhnXC53oDwaVLdTkGXA8m6fuH" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:58058 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751155AbbEETEj (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 15:04:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <554912D6.7000204@redhat.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: David Zafman Cc: "Shu, Xinxin" , Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --7N1kaX51JhnXC53oDwaVLdTkGXA8m6fuH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 05/05/2015 20:58, David Zafman wrote: >=20 > The only issue with not having wip-11139-firefly merged is getting fals= e test failures. So I can't see how this would impact the point release.= >=20 wip-11139-firefly is an hypothetical branch, right ? > David >=20 >=20 > On 5/5/15 2:17 AM, Loic Dachary wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> These changes have been merged in ceph-qa-suite for about two weeks no= w, did you notice problems ? >> >> Cheers >> >> On 22/04/2015 06:25, David Zafman wrote: >>> All the changes for testing are in ceph-qa-suite firefly branch. >>> >>> After updating from the git repo, the firefly branch doesn't include = these 2 commits. Was there an issue with this change? >>> >>> David >>> >>> commit 71624947a338dabb6ed71d94e2e003bf984074cc >>> Merge: 3da69ba 35ee8e0 >>> Author: Loic Dachary >>> Date: Fri Apr 3 10:47:42 2015 +0200 >>> >>> Merge pull request #394 from dzafman/wip-11139-firefly >>> >>> ceph_manager: Check for exit status 11 from ceph-objectstore-too= l import >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Loic Dachary >>> >>> commit 35ee8e0d4e1e8cac61ff9f5d8d644f93de4cdf60 >>> Author: David Zafman >>> Date: Fri Mar 20 19:56:55 2015 -0700 >>> >>> ceph_manager: Check for exit status 11 from ceph-objectstore-too= l import >>> >>> Fixes: #11139 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: David Zafman >>> (cherry picked from commit 6c5300552d00232d6ecb2c1aa641d515c9d8c= d34) >>> >>> David >>> >>> On 4/21/15 7:39 PM, Samuel Just wrote: >>>> Ok, so ceoh_objectstrore_tool is being tested in firefly as part of = the current firefly ceph-qa-suite branch? >>>> -Sam >>>> >>>> Sent from Nine >>>> >>>> *From:* David Zafman >>>> *Sent:* Apr 21, 2015 10:16 PM >>>> *To:* Sage Weil;Loic Dachary >>>> *Cc:* Ceph Development;Shu, Xinxin;sjust@redhat.com >>>> *Subject:* Re: should we prepare to release firefly v0.80.10 ? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> In early march I ran rados:thrash on the firefly backport of the >>>> ceph-objectstore-tool changes (wip-cot-firefly). We considered it >>>> passed, even though an obscure segfault was seen: >>>> >>>> bug #11141: Segmentation Violation: ceph-objectstore-tool doing --op= >>>> list-pgs >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4/21/15 8:52 AM, Sage Weil wrote: >>>>> The bulk of it is ceph-objectstore-tool, which is important to get = into a >>>>> release, IMO. David, are these being tested in the firefly thrashi= ng >>>>> tests yet? >>>>> >>>>> The only other one I'm worried about is >>>>> >>>>> 6fd3dfa osd: do not ignore deleted pgs on startup >>>>> >>>>> Sam, I assume the recent hammer upgrade issue is would bite firefly= folks >>>>> who upgrade too? >>>>> >>>>> sage >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Loic Dachary wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Sage, >>>>>> >>>>>> The firefly branch has a number of fixes ( http://tracker.ceph.com= /issues/11090#Release-information ) and has been used for upgrade tests i= n the past few weeks. A few other issues have been backported since and a= re being tested in the integration branch ( http://tracker.ceph.com/issue= s/11090#teuthology-run-commitb91bbb434e6363a99a632cf3841f70f1f2549f79-int= egration-branch-april-2015 ). >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you think these changes deserve a firefly v0.80.10 release ? Sh= ould we ask each lead for their approval ? Or is it better to keep backpo= rting what needs to be and wait a few weeks ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> >>>>>> --=20 >>>>>> Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre >>>>>> >>>> --=20 >>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel= " in >>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>>> >>>> >=20 > --=20 > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" i= n > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --7N1kaX51JhnXC53oDwaVLdTkGXA8m6fuH 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) iEYEARECAAYFAlVJFEQACgkQ8dLMyEl6F202VQCgqdeCOk/02RE634GdJF3PzK4f iysAoKqph+DyK79h+1dM+cl8R4AGszUS =Zmfs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7N1kaX51JhnXC53oDwaVLdTkGXA8m6fuH--