I do a basic series of tests after upgrade including: This process takes about a day or so to burn in.
-bonnie++ -failover, shutdown of bricks -self-heal after simulated brick failure -Test VMs - similar to those running in production - run unit tests against those VMs -bonnie++ inside VMs and compare results to previous run. I'm open to suggestions on other tests though. On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:22 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri < pkara...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 11/20/2014 04:25 AM, Vince Loschiavo wrote: > > I'm running 3.6.1 in pre-production right now. So far so good. No > critical bugs found. > > What tests do you run? > > Pranith > > Centos 6.5, > QEMU/KVM > Fuse Mount > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Joe Julian <j...@julianfamily.org> wrote: > >> >> On 11/19/2014 01:34 PM, Justin Clift wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:26:15 +0100 >>> Andreas Hollaus <andreas.holl...@ericsson.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'm curious about the different 'families' of GlusterFS (3.4, 3.5 & >>>> 3.6). What's the differences between them and how do I know which one >>>> will be most suitable for my application (depending on if I >>>> prioritize robustness or lots of features)? >>>> >>> Hmm, this is might help from the robustness/features perspective: :) >>> >>> * 3.4.x series has been around for ages now, so is pretty battle >>> tested. We still release patch versions for this for important >>> bugs which show up. >>> >> 3.4 has some, imho, critical known bugs with fixes that have already >> been applied to 3.5 and were not backported. For this lack of support I no >> longer recommend 3.4. >> >>> >>> * 3.5.x series has been around a while as well, and is also pretty >>> well tested by now. It has more features / and several internal >>> optimisations/improvements over the 3.4.x series. We release >>> patches for this series too for important bugs that show up. >>> >> This is the version I currently recommend. >> >>> >>> * 3.6.x series just came out. It's our latest and greatest feature >>> set, but may be a bit "bleeding edge" until the next patch release >>> (3.6.2), which should be coming out soon. >>> >> I'm still waiting on significant reports of success before I'll >> recommend 3.6. I also watch for bugs that can only be fixed in this >> release, or lack of support for prior releases, or significant improvements >> in usability before I upgrade my recommendations. >> >>> >>> This makes me realise we really need a version/features table on the >>> website, with ticks and crosses to show which version of GlusterFS >>> added what. :D >>> >>> + Justin >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gluster-users mailing list >> Gluster-users@gluster.org >> http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> > > > > -- > -Vince Loschiavo > > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing > listGluster-users@gluster.orghttp://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > > -- -Vince Loschiavo
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users