Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-infra] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Aravinda
I think not having NetBSD runs for every patch will introduce new set of problems, like - who will debug the nightly failures? - If NetBSD failures queued up everyday, then how to address those issues - Additional overhead to identify which patch caused nightly build failure

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-infra] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Avra Sengupta
On 01/07/2016 02:39 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 05:49:04PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote: I re triggered NetBSD regressions for http://review.gluster.org/#/c/13041/3 but they are being run in silent mode and are not completing. Can some one from the infra-team take a look?

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-infra] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Nithya Balachandran
I agree. Regards, Nithya - Original Message - > From: "Atin Mukherjee" > To: "Joseph Fernandes" , "Avra Sengupta" > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" , "gluster-infra" > > Sent:

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Ravishankar N
On 01/07/2016 03:52 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote: Yes, the test that failed is "dd if=/dev/zero of=$N0/test-big-write >count=500 bs=1024k" >I don't know why. Did the test fail (with an error)? or was it hung? It failed with EIO. mount_nfs: can't access /patchy: Permission denied mount_nfs:

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Jeff Darcy wrote: > I'd prefer a "defined level of effort" approach which *might* reduce the > benefit we derive from NetBSD testing but *definitely* keeps the cost > under control. Did we identify the worst offenders within the spurious failing tests? We could ignore their

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD portability (was Re: NetBSD tests not running to completion)

2016-01-07 Thread Ira Cooper
Kaleb KEITHLEY writes: > On 01/07/2016 08:47 AM, Jeff Darcy wrote: I am not that big a fan of portable software development at all- more so for system software. >>> >>> This can be discussed for server side, but for client side, making >>> glusterfs linux-only

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Avra Sengupta
On 01/07/2016 07:24 PM, Jeff Darcy wrote: I'd prefer a "defined level of effort" approach which *might* reduce the benefit we derive from NetBSD testing but *definitely* keeps the cost under control. Did we identify the worst offenders within the spurious failing tests? We could ignore their

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Jeff Darcy wrote: > > Now what is the policy on post-merge regression failure? What happens > > if original submitter is now willing to investigate? > > Then regressions will continue to fail on NetBSD, as they do now, but > without impacting work on other platforms. Well

Re: [Gluster-devel] FreeBSD port of GlusterFS racks up a lot of CPU usage

2016-01-07 Thread Raghavendra G
Sorry for the delayed reply. Had missed out this mail. Please find my comments inlined. On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Rick Macklem wrote: > Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > > > > On Dec 30, 2015, at 2:31 AM, Niels de Vos wrote: > > > > > >> I'm guessing

Re: [Gluster-devel] snapshot/bug-1227646.t throws core [rev...@dev.gluster.org: Change in glusterfs[master]: hook-scripts: reconsile mount, fixing manual mount]

2016-01-07 Thread Raghavendra G
+sakshi. On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Raghavendra G wrote: > Sakshi is looking into this. > > @Sakshi, > > Please update your progress on this thread. > > regards, > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote: > >> On 01/06/2016 01:55

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Ravishankar N
On 01/08/2016 09:57 AM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: I am a bit disturbed by the fact that people raise the "NetBSD regression ruins my life" issue without doing the work of listing the actual issues encountered. I already did earlier- the lack of infrastructure to even find out what caused the

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Ravishankar N wrote: > > I am a bit disturbed by the fact that people raise the > > "NetBSD regression ruins my life" issue without doing the work of > > listing the actual issues encountered. > I already did earlier- the lack of infrastructure to even find out what >

Re: [Gluster-devel] snapshot/bug-1227646.t throws core [rev...@dev.gluster.org: Change in glusterfs[master]: hook-scripts: reconsile mount, fixing manual mount]

2016-01-07 Thread Raghavendra G
Sakshi is looking into this. @Sakshi, Please update your progress on this thread. regards, On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote: > On 01/06/2016 01:55 AM, Rajesh Joseph wrote: > >> Yesterday, I looked into the core. From the core it looked like the >>

Re: [Gluster-devel] snapshot/bug-1227646.t throws core [rev...@dev.gluster.org: Change in glusterfs[master]: hook-scripts: reconsile mount, fixing manual mount]

2016-01-07 Thread Sakshi Bansal
The crash seems to happen in the function glusterfs_rebalance_event_notify_cbk since the frame is corrupted. I guess frame got corrupted since the calling function glusterfs_rebalance_event_notify seems to immediately call STACK_DESTROY after calling the cbk. I ran the snapshot test to check,

Re: [Gluster-devel] Gerrit review, submit type and Jenkins testing

2016-01-07 Thread Raghavendra Talur
Top posting, this is a very old thread. Keeping in view the recent NetBSD problems and the number of bugs creeping in, I suggest we do these things right now: a. Change the gerrit merge type to fast forward only. As explained below in the thread, with our current setup even if both PatchA and

Re: [Gluster-devel] Gerrit review, submit type and Jenkins testing

2016-01-07 Thread Kaushal M
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Kaushal M wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: >> Top posting, this is a very old thread. >> >> Keeping in view the recent NetBSD problems and the number of bugs creeping >> in, I suggest we do

Re: [Gluster-devel] Gerrit review, submit type and Jenkins testing

2016-01-07 Thread Raghavendra Talur
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Kaushal M wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Kaushal M wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Raghavendra Talur > wrote: > >> Top posting, this is a very old thread. > >> > >> Keeping in

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Raghavendra Gowdappa
> On 01/07/2016 02:39 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 05:49:04PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote: > >> I re triggered NetBSD regressions for > >> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/13041/3 > >> but they are being run in silent mode and are not completing. Can some one > >> from the

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Krutika Dhananjay
- Original Message - > From: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" > To: "Emmanuel Dreyfus" , "Ravishankar N" > > Cc: "Gluster Devel" , "gluster-infra" > > Sent: Friday, January 8,

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
On 01/07/2016 02:39 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 05:49:04PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote: I re triggered NetBSD regressions for http://review.gluster.org/#/c/13041/3 but they are being run in silent mode and are not completing. Can some one from the infra-team take a

Re: [Gluster-devel] Gerrit review, submit type and Jenkins testing

2016-01-07 Thread Kaushal M
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: > Top posting, this is a very old thread. > > Keeping in view the recent NetBSD problems and the number of bugs creeping > in, I suggest we do these things right now: > > a. Change the gerrit merge type to fast forward

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD portability (was Re: NetBSD tests not running to completion)

2016-01-07 Thread Kaleb KEITHLEY
On 01/07/2016 02:24 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: > >> I was in the middle of composing a reply along pretty much the same >> lines when I saw Jeff's reply land in my inbox. >> >> We are migrating from gnfs to NFS-Ganesha for NFS; NFS-Ganesha uses >>

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Avra Sengupta wrote: > Agree with your point. If we are ready to make exceptions, then we might > as well not block all the patches. As Jeff suggested, triaging the > nightly/weekly results manually and making any serious issues a blocker > should suffice. How are you

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD tests not running to completion.

2016-01-07 Thread Jeff Darcy
> How are you going to make a serious issue a blocker? We can turn off the "merge" button at any time, by either technical or social means. The "how" is easy; it's the "when" that's fraught with controversy. > If we go that way, we need to run a regression for each merged patch, > which will be

Re: [Gluster-devel] FreeBSD port of GlusterFS racks up a lot of CPU usage

2016-01-07 Thread Niels de Vos
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 09:00:32AM -0500, Rick Macklem wrote: > Niels de Vos wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 08:12:40PM -0500, Rick Macklem wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm been playing with the FreeBSD port of GlusterFS and it seems > > > to be working ok. I do notice that the daemons use a

Re: [Gluster-devel] NetBSD portability (was Re: NetBSD tests not running to completion)

2016-01-07 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: > I was in the middle of composing a reply along pretty much the same > lines when I saw Jeff's reply land in my inbox. > > We are migrating from gnfs to NFS-Ganesha for NFS; NFS-Ganesha uses > GFAPI. If Samba isn't already using a GFAPI-based VFS, it