Re: [Gluster-devel] IMP: upgrade issue

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 02/13/2018 12:35 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Jiffin Tony Thottan > > > wrote: > > > > Since the change was there

[Gluster-devel] Migration of Centos CI jobs to it's own repo

Hello folks, I'm trying to make the glusterfs-patch-acceptance-tests repo lighter by really only having code that's needed to run regressions and build for gluster. The Centos CI jobs, therefore need to move to it's own repo. As a first step, I've created a new repo[1] for centos ci jobs. The

Re: [Gluster-devel] IMP: upgrade issue

On 02/13/2018 12:35 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Jiffin Tony Thottan > > wrote: > > Since the change was there from 3.10 onwards, only upgrade from > eoled version to stable will break right? > >

Re: [Gluster-devel] IMP: upgrade issue

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Jiffin Tony Thottan wrote: > Since the change was there from 3.10 onwards, only upgrade from eoled > version to stable will break right? > > I didn't notice anyone complaining about the issue in community till now. > If any one upgrades the

Re: [Gluster-devel] IMP: upgrade issue

Since the change was there from 3.10 onwards, only upgrade from eoled version to stable will break right? I didn't notice anyone complaining about the issue in community till now. -- Jiffin On Tuesday 13 February 2018 08:21 AM, Hari Gowtham wrote: I'm working on it. On Tue, Feb 13, 2018

[Gluster-devel] https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19543/

Hi, I have been thinking of how to speed up up MAKE_HANDLE_PATH and have put up a test patch ($subject).This will first try with a buffer of 1K and only fall back to the calculation of the patch doesn't fit in that space. I think it likely that 1K will be sufficient for most data sets. A better

Re: [Gluster-devel] IMP: upgrade issue

I'm working on it. On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > FYI.. We need to backport https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19552 (yet to be > merged in mainline) in all the active release branches to avoid users to get > into upgrade failures. The bug and the

[Gluster-devel] IMP: upgrade issue

FYI.. We need to backport https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19552 (yet to be merged in mainline) in all the active release branches to avoid users to get into upgrade failures. The bug and the commit has the further details. ___ Gluster-devel mailing list

Re: [Gluster-devel] GlusterFS project contribution.

Hi Javier, While glusterfs is the main repo many developers work on, there are many more projects out there at https://github.com/gluster Feel free to browse through the repositories, and see if something triggers your interest. Some of the things I can suggest are * Gluster-Ansible (if you

Re: [Gluster-devel] GlusterFS project contribution.

Hi Raghavendra, Thank you very much for your answer. Looking on an area that is of my interest to start contributing. Best regards, *Javier Romero* *E-mail: xavi...@gmail.com * *Skype: xavinux* 2018-02-12 1:08 GMT-03:00 Raghavendra Gowdappa : > Hi

Re: [Gluster-devel] use-case for 4 replicas and 1 arbiter

On 02/12/2018 05:02 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: Hi Ravi, Last week I was in a discussion about 4-way replication and one arbiter (5 bricks per set). It seems that it is not possible to create this configuration through the CLI. What would it take to make this available? The most important changes

[Gluster-devel] Coverity covscan for 2018-02-12-535fd517 (master branch)

GlusterFS Coverity covscan results are available from http://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/static-analysis/master/glusterfs-coverity/2018-02-12-535fd517 ___ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org

[Gluster-devel] use-case for 4 replicas and 1 arbiter

Hi Ravi, Last week I was in a discussion about 4-way replication and one arbiter (5 bricks per set). It seems that it is not possible to create this configuration through the CLI. What would it take to make this available? The idea is to get a high available storage, split over three