On Monday 14 July 2014 07:33 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
Hi All,
I intend creating the 3.6 branch tomorrow. After that, the branch will
be restricted to bug fixes only. If you have any major patches to be
reviewed and merged for release-3.6, please update this thread.
Thanks,
Vijay
I have 2 pa
Its pretty much the same on FreeBSD, i didn't spend much time debugging it.
Let me do it right away and let you know what i find.
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am still stuck with resoluving NetBSD failure of
> tests/basic/afr/self-heal.t. As reported earlie
Hi
I am still stuck with resoluving NetBSD failure of
tests/basic/afr/self-heal.t. As reported earlier, gluster volume status
will not report glustershd presence if a volume is started or restarted.
Once glusterd is restarted, gluster volume status will show glustershd
again.
Help would be welcom
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8246/
Two important things it achieves
- Break-way from '/var/lib/glusterd' hard-coded previously,
instead rely on 'configure' value from 'localstatedir'
- Provide 's/lib/db' as default working directory for gluster
management daemon for BSD and Darwin based inst
Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
> What is the time-line you want this to be reviewed within? I am busy this
> week. Is it ok if I can pick this up after this week? If it is very
> urgent I can try to allocate some time for it.
Next week is fine, no problem.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.f
CC gluster-devel, Anuradha who committed the test.
Pranith
On 07/15/2014 01:58 AM, Harshavardhana wrote:
Mr Spurious is here again!
Patch Set 2: Verified-1
http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/351/consoleFull
: FAILED
Test Summary Report
---
./te
Emmanuel,
- Original Message -
> From: "Emmanuel Dreyfus"
> To: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" , "James"
>
> Cc: "Gluster Devel"
> Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 1:51:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] P
>
> Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
>
> > I can help you out with the review of the paper.
>
On 14/07/2014, at 6:13 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
> I was thinking about "git blame"/original submitter, without implying guilt
> of any kind.
That's what I do. And look in the MAINTAINERS file, and
also try to pick out a few people that have a good chance
to caring about the specific code in
On 14 Jul 2014 18:39, Jeff Darcy wrote:
>
> > When submitting patches where there is an/some obvious person(s) to blame,
> > is it OK/desirable to request them as Code-Reviewers in gerrit?
>
> Inviting reviewers with clear interest or knowledge in a piece of code is
> not only OK but recommend
On 14/07/2014, at 4:20 PM, Anders Blomdell wrote:
> On 2014-07-14 16:03, Vijay Bellur wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I intend creating the 3.6 branch tomorrow. After that, the branch
>> will be restricted to bug fixes only. If you have any major patches
>> to be reviewed and merged for release-3.6, pleas
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Anders Blomdell
wrote:
> When submitting patches where there is an/some obvious person(s) to blame,
> is it OK/desirable to request them as Code-Reviewers in gerrit?
Gist of adding "Core-Reviewers" is to find faults in oneself - not the
other way around :-)
--
R
> When submitting patches where there is an/some obvious person(s) to blame,
> is it OK/desirable to request them as Code-Reviewers in gerrit?
Inviting reviewers with clear interest or knowledge in a piece of code is
not only OK but recommended. I think "blame" might not be a good idea,
though.
_
When submitting patches where there is an/some obvious person(s) to blame,
is it OK/desirable to request them as Code-Reviewers in gerrit?
/Anders
--
Anders Blomdell Email: anders.blomd...@control.lth.se
Department of Automatic Control
Lund University Phone:+
On 2014-07-14 16:03, Vijay Bellur wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I intend creating the 3.6 branch tomorrow. After that, the branch
> will be restricted to bug fixes only. If you have any major patches
> to be reviewed and merged for release-3.6, please update this
> thread.
Does this mean that https://bugzi
My patch for improving peer identification [1] needs to get in. It's
functionally complete and can be merged right now. But KP has some
minor comments. I'll update it tonight, and it should be good for
merge by the morning,
~kaushal
[1] https://review.gluster.org/8238
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 7:3
Hi All,
I intend creating the 3.6 branch tomorrow. After that, the branch will
be restricted to bug fixes only. If you have any major patches to be
reviewed and merged for release-3.6, please update this thread.
Thanks,
Vijay
___
Gluster-devel maili
Hi Eco,
Humble just published a blog post about the new GlusterFS 3.4.5
beta2 RPMs:
http://blog.gluster.org/2014/07/glusterfs-3-4-5beta2-rpms-are-available-now/
How do we get the www.gluster.org website updated, so new blog
posts appear automagically?
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
-
On 14/07/2014, at 7:40 AM, Joseph Fernandes wrote:
> After this I restart slave30 and executed the whole regression test again and
> never hit his issue.
> Looks like the issue is not originated @ bug-1112559.t. The failure in
> bug-1112559.t test 10 is the result because of a previous failure
On 14/07/2014, at 6:38 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>> Kick off a regression test manually here, and see if the same
>> failure occurs:
>>
>> http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB/
>>
>> If it happens again, it's not a spurious one.
> I believe this is a spurious one. I d
Hello,
Following is a proposal for modifying the io profiling capability of the
io-stats xlator. I recently sent in a patch(review.gluster.org/#/c/8244/)
regarding that, which uses the already written latency related functions in
io-stats to dump info through meta and added some more data conta
Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
> I can help you out with the review of the paper.
Here is it, please send a diff with your changes:
http://ftp.espci.fr/shadow/manu/fuse.txt
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.org
___
Gluster-devel
21 matches
Mail list logo
