Loic Dachary writes: > Hi Abhishek, > > Looking at the last two issues marked as needing backport to giant: > > http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph/issues?query_id=68 > > (this link is at the top of > http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wiki/HOWTO) I'm not sure what > to do about http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10643. The problem is that it > consistently shows up when testing upgrades that involve giant. We want to be > sure Giant can be upgraded to Hammer, therefore we need to keep testing the > upgrades at least for a month or two after Hammer is released to catch border > cases. I think issue 10643 needs to be fixed and included in 0.87.2 so that > we can have clean upgrade tests, otherwise it will mean more work for people > watching over the upgrade suites (I mean Yuri here ;-). And wif 10643 is > included we can squeeze http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10153 in as well, I > think. > > Once this is dealt with and you're done with > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11259 that you found when running the rgw > suite at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11153#rgw, 0.87.2 should be good, > from our point of view (the point of view of backporters) and we can move to > the "asking approval" step of the workflow ( > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11153#Workflow ).
For this issue, I haven't been able to find out the cause yet, there seemed to be only one patch that landed in giant related to quotas, however the test seemed to have failed even before that. I've updated the tracker with this. > > What do you think ? Overall sounds good. -- Abhishek
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
