From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Zafman Subject: Re: should we prepare to release firefly v0.80.10 ? Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 12:24:13 -0700 Message-ID: <554918DD.1010104@redhat.com> References: <55362279.5060105@dachary.org> <55367E8D.1090805@redhat.com> <5537229F.4050501@redhat.com> <55488AA7.5020709@dachary.org> <554912D6.7000204@redhat.com> <55491444.2040209@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35725 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752574AbbEETZR (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 15:25:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <55491444.2040209@dachary.org> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Loic Dachary Cc: "Shu, Xinxin" , Ceph Development Yes, that branch has been deleted. I resurrected the name in order to=20 create and merge pull request #419 after pull request #394 merge was=20 clobbered somehow. David On 5/5/15 12:04 PM, Loic Dachary wrote: > > On 05/05/2015 20:58, David Zafman wrote: >> The only issue with not having wip-11139-firefly merged is getting f= alse test failures. So I can't see how this would impact the point rel= ease. >> > wip-11139-firefly is an hypothetical branch, right ? > >> David >> >> >> 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= now, 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 inclu= de 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= -tool 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= -tool import >>>> >>>> Fixes: #11139 >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: David Zafman >>>> (cherry picked from commit 6c5300552d00232d6ecb2c1aa641d515c= 9d8cd34) >>>> >>>> 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 i= t >>>>> 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 g= et into a >>>>>> release, IMO. David, are these being tested in the firefly thra= shing >>>>>> 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 fire= fly 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 te= sts in the past few weeks. A few other issues have been backported sinc= e and are being tested in the integration branch ( http://tracker.ceph.= com/issues/11090#teuthology-run-commitb91bbb434e6363a99a632cf3841f70f1f= 2549f79-integration-branch-april-2015 ). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you think these changes deserve a firefly v0.80.10 release ?= Should we ask each lead for their approval ? Or is it better to keep b= ackporting 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-de= vel" in >>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htm= l >>>>> >>>>> >> --=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 -- 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