Re: [Gluster-devel] ./tests/bugs/write-behind/bug-1279730.t is failing on unrelated patches

http://review.gluster.org/#/c/14443 moves test to BAD test. Please note that this is a temporary solution and the issue needs to be RCAed. I've filed bz [1] to track the issue uncovered by the test failure. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=133 - Original Message - >

[Gluster-devel] Unsplit-brain policies patch

Hi Richard, You might already be be getting notifications about the review comments on http://review.gluster.org/#/c/14026/. Wanted your feedback on how you handled cases for the 'majority' policy of resolution when there is no majority for selecting a brick as a source in your original [1]

Re: [Gluster-devel] tarissue.t spurious failure

on 3.8 branch ./tests/basic/afr/tarissue.t failing https://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/20965/consoleFull - Original Message - > From: "Ravishankar N" > To: "Krutika Dhananjay" > Cc: "Gluster Devel"

Re: [Gluster-devel] self heal start failure on 3.8rc1

Ravishankar N wrote: > Yes, since 3.8 was based off master, it has the same issue. > http://review.gluster.org/#/c/14414/ has been merged to fix it. If you > want to temporarily workaround it, just do some dummy 'gluster volume > set` operation to regenerate the client

Re: [Gluster-devel] self heal start failure on 3.8rc1

On 05/20/2016 09:09 AM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: Hello After updating from 3.7.11 to 3.8rc1, self heal daemon will not start anymore. Here is the log. The "op-version >= 30707" error reminds me something we already saw in the past. Yes, since 3.8 was based off master, it has the same issue.

[Gluster-devel] self heal start failure on 3.8rc1

Hello After updating from 3.7.11 to 3.8rc1, self heal daemon will not start anymore. Here is the log. The "op-version >= 30707" error reminds me something we already saw in the past. Any hint? [2016-05-20 03:34:40.709337] I [MSGID: 100030] [glusterfsd.c:2350:main] 0-/usr/pkg/sbin/glusterfs:

[Gluster-devel] ./tests/bugs/write-behind/bug-1279730.t is failing on unrelated patches

Hi, The test case has failed several times on unrelated patches ./tests/bugs/write-behind/bug-1279730.t, one of the regression link can be found at https://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/20942/console Appreciate if you can take a look at. Regards, Poornima

Re: [Gluster-devel] Reducing the size of the glusterdocs git repository

Hi, glusterdocs repo[1] has been cleaned of presentation files. Contributors please discard your existing forks and clones. Repo description on github has been updated to indicate the same. [1]: https://github.com/gluster/glusterdocs Regards, -Prashanth Pai - Original Message - >

Re: [Gluster-devel] tarissue.t spurious failure

On 05/19/2016 04:44 PM, Krutika Dhananjay wrote: Also, I must add that I ran it in a loop on my laptop for about 4 hours and it ran without any failure. There seems to be a genuine problem. The test was failing on my machine 1/4 times on master. -Krutika On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:42 PM,

Re: [Gluster-devel] tarissue.t spurious failure

Also, I must add that I ran it in a loop on my laptop for about 4 hours and it ran without any failure. -Krutika On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Krutika Dhananjay wrote: > tests/basic/afr/tarissue.t fails sometimes on jenkins centos slave(s). > > >

[Gluster-devel] tarissue.t spurious failure

tests/basic/afr/tarissue.t fails sometimes on jenkins centos slave(s). https://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/20915/consoleFull -Krutika ___ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org

Re: [Gluster-devel] Suggest a feature redirect

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Aravinda wrote: > > regards > Aravinda > > On 05/19/2016 12:37 PM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote: > >> On 05/19/2016 02:38 AM, Amye Scavarda wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>

Re: [Gluster-devel] Suggest a feature redirect

regards Aravinda On 05/19/2016 12:37 PM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Vijay Bellur > wrote: On 05/19/2016 02:38 AM, Amye Scavarda wrote: On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Vijay Bellur

Re: [Gluster-devel] Suggest a feature redirect

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote: > On 05/19/2016 02:38 AM, Amye Scavarda wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Vijay Bellur > > wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Raghavendra

Re: [Gluster-devel] Reducing the size of the glusterdocs git repository

- Original Message - > From: "Amye Scavarda" > To: "Kaushal M" , "Prashanth Pai" > Cc: "Raghavendra Talur" , "Gluster Devel" > , "Humble Chirammal" > > Sent:

Re: [Gluster-devel] Reducing the size of the glusterdocs git repository

Prashanth, Is this something you can take on? Thanks! - amye On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Kaushal M wrote: > As the majority seem to favour Prashanth's approach, I vote for it as well. > > Just to make it clearer for all users, please add a **highlighted** > note in

Re: [Gluster-devel] Worm translator not truly disabled by default?

Hi Vijay, The patch is http://review.gluster.org/#/c/14367/ we will merge it once the regression have passed. Regards, Joe - Original Message - > From: "Vijay Bellur" > To: "Karthik Subrahmanya" > Cc: "Joseph Fernandes" ,

Re: [Gluster-devel] Suggest a feature redirect

On 05/19/2016 02:38 AM, Amye Scavarda wrote: On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Vijay Bellur > wrote: On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Raghavendra Talur > wrote: > > > On Wed, May

Re: [Gluster-devel] Suggest a feature redirect

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Raghavendra Talur > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Amye Scavarda wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 1:46 PM,

Re: [Gluster-devel] Suggest a feature redirect

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: > > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Amye Scavarda wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Humble Devassy Chirammal >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Amye, >>> >>> afaict,

Re: [Gluster-devel] Worm translator not truly disabled by default?

Hi Karthik, Would it be possible for you to backport Krutika's patch [1] to release-3.8? I am running tests with 3.8rc0 and am running into excessive logging problems addressed by the patch. Thanks, Vijay [1] http://review.gluster.org/#/c/14182/ On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:16 AM, Karthik

Re: [Gluster-devel] Suggest a feature redirect

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Amye Scavarda wrote: > > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Humble Devassy Chirammal < > humble.deva...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Amye, >> >> afaict, the feature proposal has start from glusterfs-specs ( >>

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Idea: Alternate Release process

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: > > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Kaushal M wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Kaushal M wrote: >> > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Raghavendra Talur

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Idea: Alternate Release process

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Kaushal M wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Kaushal M wrote: > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Raghavendra Talur > wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Kaushal M

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Idea: Alternate Release process

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Kaushal M wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Kaushal M wrote: >>> >>> I'm in favour of a stable release every 2 months and

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Idea: Alternate Release process

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Raghavendra Talur wrote: > > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Kaushal M wrote: >> >> I'm in favour of a stable release every 2 months and an LTS once a >> year (option 2). > > > +1 > >> >> >> As Oleksander already

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] Idea: Alternate Release process

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Kaushal M wrote: > I'm in favour of a stable release every 2 months and an LTS once a > year (option 2). > +1 > > As Oleksander already suggested, I'm in favour of having well defined > merge windows, freeze dates and testing period. > (A