From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: CephFS and the next infernalis release v9.2.1 Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 08:33:51 +0700 Message-ID: <56BE87FF.3080307@dachary.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.198]:36442 "EHLO relay6-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752046AbcBMBeD (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Feb 2016 20:34:03 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Gregory Farnum , Abhishek Varshney Cc: Ceph Development On 13/02/2016 01:13, Gregory Farnum wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Abhishek Varshney > wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> The next infernalis release as found at >> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/infernalis passed most of the Ceph= =46S >> suite ( http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13750#note-19 ) except for 1 >> failure, which was not seen at a later run ( >> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13750#note-26 ). Do you think the >> infernalis branch is ready for QE to start their own round of testin= g >> ? >=20 > Uh, assuming I'm reading this correctly, you've hit a known > intermittent bug which happened to show up on one run, but not the > next. >=20 > You can release without the fix (it's not a regression), but please > realize that we have a lot of intermittent bugs so just because an > issue doesn't appear in one run doesn't mean the issue is gone. :) Hi Greg, We realize there are intermittent bugs. This is why we're asking you to= decide wether this specific bug should be a blocker for the release or= not. What do you think ? Cheers --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre -- 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