CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Loic Dachary]

Hi Greg,

The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ).

Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ?

Cheers

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre

--
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

Re: CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Gregory Farnum]

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ).
>
> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ?

Well, one of them looks to be an infrastructure issue of some kind.
You appear to have figured out the fsstress one
(http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14584#change-65185), and the fsx one
is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport
in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working
version of the repo).
-Greg

Re: CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Nathan Cutler]

> . . . and the fsx one
> is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport
> in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working
> version of the repo).

Backport staged:

http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14624
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/7501

-- 
Nathan Cutler
Software Engineer Distributed Storage
SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.
Tel.: +420 284 084 037

Re: CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Loic Dachary]

Hi Greg,

On 03/02/2016 16:23, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ).
>>
>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ?
> 
> Well, one of them looks to be an infrastructure issue of some kind.
> You appear to have figured out the fsstress one
> (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14584#change-65185), and the fsx one
> is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport

Thanks for the pointer :-) (and to Nathan for backporting).

> in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working
> version of the repo).

Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?

Cheers

> -Greg
> --
> 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
> 

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
--
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

Re: CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Loic Dachary]

Hi Greg,

Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?

Cheers

On 04/02/2016 12:44, Loic Dachary wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 03/02/2016 16:23, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Greg,
>>>
>>> The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ).
>>>
>>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ?
>>
>> Well, one of them looks to be an infrastructure issue of some kind.
>> You appear to have figured out the fsstress one
>> (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14584#change-65185), and the fsx one
>> is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport
> 
> Thanks for the pointer :-) (and to Nathan for backporting).
> 
>> in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working
>> version of the repo).
> 
> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
> 
> Cheers
> 
>> -Greg
>> --
>> 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
>>
> 

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
--
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

Re: CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Gregory Farnum]

Yes, just wanted those two fixes we discussed. :)

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>
> Cheers
>
> On 04/02/2016 12:44, Loic Dachary wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> On 03/02/2016 16:23, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi Greg,
>>>>
>>>> The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ).
>>>>
>>>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ?
>>>
>>> Well, one of them looks to be an infrastructure issue of some kind.
>>> You appear to have figured out the fsstress one
>>> (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14584#change-65185), and the fsx one
>>> is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport
>>
>> Thanks for the pointer :-) (and to Nathan for backporting).
>>
>>> in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working
>>> version of the repo).
>>
>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>> -Greg
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
--
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

Re: CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Loic Dachary]

Hi,

I will run a single job with https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/7501 to verify it does work before merging it. Will that be enough ?

Cheers

On 08/02/2016 10:44, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> Yes, just wanted those two fixes we discussed. :)
> 
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> On 04/02/2016 12:44, Loic Dachary wrote:
>>> Hi Greg,
>>>
>>> On 03/02/2016 16:23, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Greg,
>>>>>
>>>>> The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ).
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ?
>>>>
>>>> Well, one of them looks to be an infrastructure issue of some kind.
>>>> You appear to have figured out the fsstress one
>>>> (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14584#change-65185), and the fsx one
>>>> is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport
>>>
>>> Thanks for the pointer :-) (and to Nathan for backporting).
>>>
>>>> in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working
>>>> version of the repo).
>>>
>>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>> -Greg
>>>> --
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
> 

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
--
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

Re: CephFS and the next hammer release v0.94.6

[Gregory Farnum]

Yeah.

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 9:10 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I will run a single job with https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/7501 to verify it does work before merging it. Will that be enough ?
>
> Cheers
>
> On 08/02/2016 10:44, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> Yes, just wanted those two fixes we discussed. :)
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Greg,
>>>
>>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> On 04/02/2016 12:44, Loic Dachary wrote:
>>>> Hi Greg,
>>>>
>>>> On 03/02/2016 16:23, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Greg,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The next hammer release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/hammer passed the fs suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13356#note-25). A more recent run showed 3 failures and I'm not sure how to interpret them ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2016-01-29_03:02:05-fs-hammer---basic-multi/ ).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ? Or should the above errors be investigated first ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, one of them looks to be an infrastructure issue of some kind.
>>>>> You appear to have figured out the fsstress one
>>>>> (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14584#change-65185), and the fsx one
>>>>> is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14384. I'd get that quick backport
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the pointer :-) (and to Nathan for backporting).
>>>>
>>>>> in as well (it's just a change to the qa script to point at a working
>>>>> version of the repo).
>>>>
>>>> Do you think the hammer branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testing ?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>>> -Greg
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
>>
>
> --
> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
--
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