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: Fri, 15 May 2015 15:44:59 +0200 Message-ID: <5555F85B.3000407@dachary.org> References: <55362279.5060105@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ijtASEm4reua29ohkleju5Hk1v1e3Mu6H" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:35822 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422697AbbEONpF (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2015 09:45:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sage Weil Cc: Ceph Development , "Shu, Xinxin" , dzafman@redhat.com, sjust@redhat.com This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --ijtASEm4reua29ohkleju5Hk1v1e3Mu6H Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Sage, On 21/04/2015 17:52, Sage Weil wrote: > The bulk of it is ceph-objectstore-tool, which is important to get into= a=20 > release, IMO. David, are these being tested in the firefly thrashing=20 > tests yet? >=20 > The only other one I'm worried about is >=20 > 6fd3dfa osd: do not ignore deleted pgs on startup >=20 > Sam, I assume the recent hammer upgrade issue is would bite firefly fol= ks=20 > who upgrade too? A backport of "OSD::load_pgs: we need to handle the case where an upgrade= from earlier versions which ignored non-existent pgs resurrects a pg wit= h a prehistoric osdmap" http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11429 found at htt= ps://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/4556 has been successfully tested on firef= ly at http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-05-13_00:01:26-rados-firefly-back= ports---basic-multi/ and in a rados suite run that completed today http:/= /tracker.ceph.com/issues/11090#rados. Provided https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/4556 is merged, do you think w= e should prepare to release firefly v0.80.10 ? Cheers >=20 > sage >=20 >=20 > On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Loic Dachary wrote: >=20 >> Hi Sage, >> >> The firefly branch has a number of fixes ( http://tracker.ceph.com/iss= ues/11090#Release-information ) and has been used for upgrade tests in th= e past few weeks. A few other issues have been backported since and are b= eing tested in the integration branch ( http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11= 090#teuthology-run-commitb91bbb434e6363a99a632cf3841f70f1f2549f79-integra= tion-branch-april-2015 ).=20 >> >> 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 backportin= g what needs to be and wait a few weeks ? >> >> Cheers >> >> --=20 >> Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre >> --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --ijtASEm4reua29ohkleju5Hk1v1e3Mu6H 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) iEYEARECAAYFAlVV+FsACgkQ8dLMyEl6F20rSQCfX2V/915CNI4AXaTsvmfh4p3S i0QAoJ+UnLuSQQzv4qYiQhAsqLTuaVVN =iz0D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ijtASEm4reua29ohkleju5Hk1v1e3Mu6H--