> On Nov 29, 2015, at 9:33 PM, Dan McDonald <dan...@omniti.com> wrote:
>
> I've now done that. Your other comments I'm going to hold for now, because I
> want to make sure what IS there runs (missing in the runfiles I found out
> concurrently when examining my results). After I get before-and-after tests
> running, I'll go back and address the earlier mail's comments.
I ran into a few problems while running the ZFS test suite, mostly around not
SYNC-ing and overfilling my very small 256MB test disks. Here is the ZFS test
webrev, with more updates:
http://kebe.com/~danmcd/webrevs/test-4986/
Also -- earlier, Yuri asked:
> I think this test case belongs in cli_root/zfs_receive, not refquota itself,
> as we fail to receive intermediate snapshot due to refquota setting (if I
> understand it correctly).
I thought it belonged in refquota, because that's where the problem was. OTOH,
I'm not married to my idea. Does anyone else here have a strong opinion about
whether or not this test should go in the cli_root/zfs_receive or in refquota?
(Or even a third place Yuri or I didn't imagine?)
Thanks,
Dan
_______________________________________________
developer mailing list
developer@open-zfs.org
http://lists.open-zfs.org/mailman/listinfo/developer
