On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 9:10 AM Ken Dreyer <kdre...@redhat.com> wrote:

> At a general level, is there any way we could update the documentation
> automatically whenever src/common/config_opts.h changes?


GitHub PR hooks that block any change to the file which doesn't include a
documentation patch including those strings?
I don't think anything weaker is likely to be reliable. :)
-Greg



>
> - Ken
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Nick Fisk <n...@fisk.me.uk> wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf
> Of John Spray
> >> Sent: 07 March 2017 01:45
> >> To: Christian Balzer <ch...@gol.com>
> >> Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> >> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] A Jewel in the rough? (cache tier bugs and
> documentation omissions)
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Christian Balzer <ch...@gol.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > It's now 10 months after this thread:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-users/msg27497.html (plus next
> >> > message)
> >> >
> >> > and we're at the fifth iteration of Jewel and still
> >> >
> >> > osd_tier_promote_max_objects_sec
> >> > and
> >> > osd_tier_promote_max_bytes_sec
> >> >
> >> > are neither documented (master or jewel), nor mentioned in the
> >> > changelogs and most importantly STILL default to the broken reverse
> settings above.
> >>
> >> Is there a pull request?
> >
> > Mark fixed it in this commit, but looks like it was never marked for
> backport to Jewel.
> >
> >
> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/793ceac2f3d5a2c404ac50569c44a21de6001b62
> >
> > I will look into getting the documentation updated for these settings.
> >
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> > Anybody coming from Hammer or even starting with Jewel and using cache
> >> > tiering will be having a VERY bad experience.
> >> >
> >> > Christian
> >> > --
> >> > Christian Balzer        Network/Systems Engineer
> >> > ch...@gol.com           Global OnLine Japan/Rakuten Communications
> >> > http://www.gol.com/
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > ceph-users mailing list
> >> > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> >> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ceph-users mailing list
> >> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ceph-users mailing list
> > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to