Emmanuel,
I am not sure of the feasibility but just wanted to ask you. Do
you think there is a possibility to error out operations on the mount
when mount crashes instead of hanging? That would prevent a lot of
manual intervention even in future.
Pranith.
On 06/15/2015 01:35 PM, Niels
The hang we observe is not something specific to Gluster. I've
observed this kind of hangs when a filesystem which is in use goes
offline.
For example I've accidently shutdown machines which were being used
for mounting nfs, which lead to the client systems hanging completely
and required a hard
Hi all,
The recent rush of reviews being sent due to the release of 3.7 was a
cause of frustration for many of us because of the regression tests
(gerrit troubles themselves are another thing).
W.R.T regression 3 main sources of frustration were,
1. Spurious test failures
2. Long wait times
3.
On 06/15/2015 04:19 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
Hi all,
The recent rush of reviews being sent due to the release of 3.7 was a
cause of frustration for many of us because of the regression tests
(gerrit troubles themselves are another thing).
W.R.T regression 3 main sources of frustration were,
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 04:38:54PM +0530, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
Emmanuel,
I am not sure of the feasibility but just wanted to ask you. Do you
think there is a possibility to error out operations on the mount when mount
crashes instead of hanging? That would prevent a lot of
On Monday 15 June 2015 04:19 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
Hi all,
The recent rush of reviews being sent due to the release of 3.7 was a
cause of frustration for many of us because of the regression tests
(gerrit troubles themselves are another thing).
W.R.T regression 3 main sources of frustration
On Monday 15 June 2015 05:21 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
The hang we observe is not something specific to Gluster. I've
observed this kind of hangs when a filesystem which is in use goes
offline.
For example I've accidently shutdown machines which were being used
for mounting nfs, which lead to the
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 06:28:26PM +0530, Rajesh Joseph wrote:
For these test cases can't we use the nfs soft mount option to prevent the
hang?
soft mount will not be enough. I think you also need interruptible.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
m...@netbsd.org
On 06/15/2015 06:49 AM, Kaushal M wrote:
...
Current auto-triggering of regression runs is stupid and a waste of
time and resources. Bring in a project gating system, Zuul, which can
do a much more intelligent jobs triggering, and use it to
automatically trigger regression only for changes
I should have made this clearer in the steps I listed.
Under the 2nd step (I should have numbered as well), I've mentioned
that Zuul will report back the status of smoke/pre-review tests. This
is the Verified+1. Though I was thinking of using different flags, we
can use Verified it self to
Hi all,
As we continue forward with OpenStack Manila and Kubernetes integration with
GlusterFS, we require a simpler method of managing volumes and bricks. We
introduce Heketi ( https://github.com/heketi ), a RESTful storage management
framework which enables certain storage systems to be
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:09:33AM -0400, Jeff Darcy wrote:
As long as there's some visible marking on the summary pages to
distinguish patches that have passed smoke vs. those that haven't, I
think we're good.
gerrit manual says you can add more comulns like revview and verified.
--
I agree Vijay, that is why we created Heketi, due to the urgency in Gluster and
Manila integration for Liberty. I think the next steps are to determine which
of the RFEs below can be satisfied by Heketi.
Luis
On Jun 15, 2015, at 3:26 AM, Vijay Bellur vbel...@redhat.com wrote:
On
On Monday 15 June 2015 06:34 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 06:28:26PM +0530, Rajesh Joseph wrote:
For these test cases can't we use the nfs soft mount option to prevent the
hang?
soft mount will not be enough. I think you also need interruptible.
Correct me if I am
A change would get a +2 from a maintainer only once the maintainer
believes that the patch is ready to be accepted. To be at this level
of confidence, the change would have been reviewed thoroughly, and
such a generally wouldn't fail regression (excluding spurious
failures). If there was something
Hi,
some more cleaner way:
Can we have a small change in this flow ?
==
What is proposed now: ( as per my understanding)
Reviewer1 gives +1
Reviewer2 gives +1
Maintainer gives +2 (for merge)
Now, regression triggered = Regression failed.
The idea is
On Jun 15, 2015 10:08 PM, Saravanakumar Arumugam sarum...@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi,
- Developer pushes change to Gerrit.
- Zuul is notified by Gerrit of new change
- Zuul runs pre-review checks on Jenkins. This will be the current
smoke tests.
- Zuul reports back status of the checks to
Hi,
- Developer pushes change to Gerrit.
- Zuul is notified by Gerrit of new change
- Zuul runs pre-review checks on Jenkins. This will be the current smoke
tests.
- Zuul reports back status of the checks to Gerrit.
- If checks fail, developer will need to resend the change after
The initial versions of the commands will establish independent connections to
a cluster node (specified by a Gluster URL scheme). Then I think I could evolve
the code to implement the shell idea that was in the design doc. Then, if I
have time left, I could try to tackle the daemon that would
I'm Craig's manager for the duration of his internship @ FB, so I thought I'd
better chime in here :). As Craig mentioned, our project plan is to
implement C-based CLI utilities similar to what we have for NFS CLI
utilities (we'll be open sourcing this in the coming days so you can see
what
As many might have guessed, I meant to send that to Richard and not
the entire list. Oh well. Haven't made that mistake for a few years,
so I guess I was due. Just as well I wasn't having one of my
snarkier moments. ;) Apologies to anyone who might have seen it as
criticism.
Hey Nithin,
We have IPv6 going as well (v3.4.x v3.6.x), so I might be able to help out
here and perhaps combine our efforts. We did something similar here, however
we also tackled the NFS side of the house, which required a bunch of changes
due to how port registration w/ portmapper changed
I've written up some thoughts about how to have multiple bricks sharing a
single process/port, since this is necessary to support other 4.0 features and
is likely to be a bit tricky to implement. Comments welcome here:
https://goo.gl/27L9I5
___
Hey all,
I'm Craig's manager for the duration of his internship @ FB, so I thought I'd
better chime in here :). As Craig mentioned, our project plan is to implement
C-based CLI utilities similar to what we have for NFS CLI utilities (we'll be
open sourcing this in the coming days so you can
Hi,
sometimes the NetBSD regression tests hang with messages like this:
[12:29:07] ./tests/basic/mgmt_v3-locks.t
... ok79867 ms
No volumes present
mount_nfs: can't access /patchy: Permission denied
mount_nfs: can't access /patchy:
On Monday 15 June 2015 03:14 AM, Joe Julian wrote:
On 06/14/2015 11:43 AM, Raghavendra Talur wrote:
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 11:02 PM, chris holcombe
chris.holco...@canonical.com mailto:chris.holco...@canonical.com
wrote:
Welcome to the party Matthew! Nice to see you're still
Hi,
I would like to reserve one of the below machines to run a regression
test for debugging. Please let me know if any of you are using them
currently.
Thanks,
Soumya
On 05/21/2015 10:46 PM, Justin Clift wrote:
There are two extra CentOS 6 VM's online for debugging stuff with,
but they're
On Tuesday 09 June 2015 04:42 PM, Ramana Raja wrote:
- Vijay Bellur vbel...@redhat.com wrote:
Would you be able to provide more light on the nature of features/APIs
planned to be exposed through Manila in Liberty? Having that information
can play an important part in prioritizing and
Hi Craig,
That's cool! I was more interested in knowing how you plan to implement the
commands.
To be specific, do you plan to connect/disconnect(glfs_init/glfs_fini) to the
gluster
server for each command or persist the connection across commands?
Regards,
Poornima
- Original Message
Thanks to Ravishankar. We could reproduce the issue on our test
machines. I shall no longer need these machines.
Thanks,
Soumya
On 06/15/2015 11:55 AM, Soumya Koduri wrote:
Hi,
I would like to reserve one of the below machines to run a regression
test for debugging. Please let me know if any
30 matches
Mail list logo
