Re: ceph-qa analysis output

[Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1722 bytes --]



On 17/01/2015 23:08, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
> Hi Loic,
> 
> I'd love to.
> 
> Let's chat on Monday to finalize format.
> 
> (
> PS:  I think format would be easier to maintain like new lines enforced, e,g.
> 
> '701575', '701576', '701582', '701590'
>  ttp://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10543
> FAILED assert(m_seed < old_pg_num

Yes, as long as it's consistent enough to be machine readable, that works :-)

> 
> PPS: Again this ticket http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10455 would be
> helpful in what we are discussing here.
> 

I'm not sure where the output of such a parsing would go. The update redmine API is currently broken (the read API works ok) but if it was fixed the tickets could be updated indeed.

Cheers

> Thx
> YuriW
> 
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org> wrote:
>> Hi Yuri,
>>
>> It would be great if the analysis you compile daily was machine readable. For instance, in a mail you sent to ceph-qa I read
>>
>> '701575', '701576', '701582', '701590' - known issue
>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10543
>>
>> "FAILED assert(m_seed < old_pg_num)"
>>
>> (duplicate of http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10430)
>>
>> which could be something like:
>>
>> '701575', '701576', '701582', '701590': http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10543 FAILED assert(m_seed < old_pg_num)
>>
>> or any other format you find easier to use consistently.
>>
>> The reason I ask is because it would help me write a script that associates redmine tickets to your findings, in the context of backporting. It's just an idea, not a request ;-)
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> --
>> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
>>

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]