Hi Dmitry, On 08/07/2015 15:07, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 11:07:43 Loic Dachary wrote: >> Without integration tests, linking Ceph against the wrong jerasure version >> may lead to data loss. Prior to publishing a Ceph version, various >> integration tests run to verify encoding / decoding, > > Those check are part of post-build tests, right?
Part of them are run with make check, others via teuthology and require multiple machines to deploy an actual cluster. Every binary combination of Ceph + jerasure + gf_complete must be tested in this way to verify non regression that could lead to permanent data loss. The process is not very complex but it requires a little infrastructure and attention to details. > While I was maintaining Ceph I've made changes to run unit tests but James > reverted it as well. :( Even if not done as part of a regular dpkg-buildpackage, make check is a must have. Although it is run many times a day, it is sensitive to the configure flag combination. >> this is the main incentive to have jerasure as part of Ceph. > > I'm sure Thomas can enable optimisations in jerasure library. > > >> The other reason is that >> jerasure can be optimized for SIMD instructions (ARM / INTEL) and not >> doing so significantly impacts performances. > > Once again, this seems to be an improvement suggestion for libjerasure rather > than argument against using system library. I'm not saying it's impossible. Jerasure has been packaged for quite some time now and no effort has been made to address these issues. Hence my proposal to work on the packages if they were orphaned. Although I could teach Thomas or someone else how and why this should be done, I don't have that kind of time right now. Working on the package is less time consuming. Cheers -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
