Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-11-04 Thread FNU Raghavendra Manjunath 
Tested Bitrot related aspects. Created data, enabled bitrot and created
more data. The files were signed by the bitrot daemon. Simulated the
corruption by editing a file directly in the backend.
Triggered scrubbing (on demand). Found that the corrupted files were marked
bad by the scrubber.

Also ran general tests such as compiling gluster code base on the mount
point, dbench. The tests passed properly.

Still running some more tests. Will keep updated.

Regards,
Raghavendra


On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
pkara...@redhat.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
> pkara...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
>> pkara...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Krutika Dhananjay 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Just finished testing VM storage use-case.

 *Volume configuration used:*

 [root@srv-1 ~]# gluster volume info

 Volume Name: rep
 Type: Replicate
 Volume ID: 2c603783-c1da-49b7-8100-0238c777b731
 Status: Started
 Snapshot Count: 0
 Number of Bricks: 1 x 3 = 3
 Transport-type: tcp
 Bricks:
 Brick1: srv-1:/bricks/rep1
 Brick2: srv-2:/bricks/rep2
 Brick3: srv-3:/bricks/rep4
 Options Reconfigured:
 nfs.disable: on
 performance.readdir-ahead: on
 transport.address-family: inet
 performance.quick-read: off
 performance.read-ahead: off
 performance.io-cache: off
 performance.stat-prefetch: off
 cluster.eager-lock: enable
 network.remote-dio: enable
 cluster.quorum-type: auto
 cluster.server-quorum-type: server
 features.shard: on
 cluster.granular-entry-heal: on
 cluster.locking-scheme: granular
 network.ping-timeout: 30
 server.allow-insecure: on
 storage.owner-uid: 107
 storage.owner-gid: 107
 cluster.data-self-heal-algorithm: full

 Used FUSE to mount the volume locally on each of the 3 nodes (no
 external clients).
 shard-block-size - 4MB.

 *TESTS AND RESULTS:*

 *What works:*

 * Created 3 vm images, one per hypervisor. Installed fedora 24 on all
 of them.
   Used virt-manager for ease of setting up the environment.
 Installation went fine. All green.

 * Rebooted the vms. Worked fine.

 * Killed brick-1. Ran dd on the three vms to create a 'src' file.
 Captured their md5sum value. Verified that
 the gfid indices and name indices are created under
 .glusterfs/indices/xattrop and .glusterfs/indices/entry-changes
 respectively as they should. Brought the brick back up. Waited until heal
 completed. Captured md5sum again. They matched.

 * Killed brick-2. Copied 'src' file from the step above into new file
 using dd. Captured md5sum on the newly created file.
 Checksum matched. Waited for heal to finish. Captured md5sum again.
 Everything matched.

 * Repeated the test above with brick-3 being killed and brought back up
 after a while. Worked fine.

 At the end I also captured md5sums from the backend of the shards on
 the three replicas. They all were found to be
 in sync. So far so good.

 *What did NOT work:*

 * Started dd again on all 3 vms to copy the existing files to new
 files. While dd was running, I ran replace-brick to replace the third brick
 with a new brick on the same node with a different path. This caused dd on
 all three vms to simultaneously fail with "Input/Output error". I tried to
 read off the files, even that failed. Rebooted the vms. By this time,
 /.shard is in
 split-brain as per heal-info. And the vms seem to have suffered
 corruption and are in an irrecoverable state.

 I checked the logs. The pattern is very much similar to the one in the
 add-brick bug Lindsay reported here - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/sh
 ow_bug.cgi?id=1387878. Seems like something is going wrong each time
 there is a graph switch.

 @Aravinda and Pranith:

 I will need some time to debug this, if 3.9 release can wait until it
 is RC'd and fixed.
 Otherwise we will need to caution the users to not do replace-brick,
 add-brick etc (or any form of graph switch for that matter) *might* cause
 vm corruption, irrespective of whether the users are using FUSE or gfapi,
 in 3.9.0.

 Let me know what your decision is.

>>>
>>> Since this bug is not a regression let us document this as a known
>>> issue. Let us do our best to get the fix in next release.
>>>
>>> I am almost done with testing afr and ec.
>>>
>>> For afr, leaks etc were not there in the tests I did.
>>> But I am seeing performance drop for crawling related tests.
>>>
>>> This is with 3.9.0rc2
>>> running directory_crawl_create ... done (252.91 secs)
>>> running directory_crawl ... done (104.83 secs)
>>> running

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-11-03 Thread Rajesh Joseph 
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Aravinda  wrote:

> Gluster 3.9.0rc2 tarball is available here
> http://bits.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/src/glusterfs-
> 3.9.0rc2.tar.gz
>
> regards
> Aravinda
>
>

Tested snapshots with 3.9.0rc2 build. Everything seems to be working fine.
Ran all the snapshot specific regressions tests.
Also created a 2x2 setup and ran most of the basic snapshots
functionalities against it. Roughly covered following scenarios:
+ Snapshot creation
+ Snapshot deletion
+ Snapshot restore
+ Snapshot config
+ activate-on-create
+ auto-delete
+ brick down cases
+ clone
+ USS


+1 to this release candidate from snapshot perspective.


>
> On Tuesday 25 October 2016 04:12 PM, Aravinda wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need help
>> from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug fixes to
>> release Gluster 3.9.
>>
>> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test day
>> to accelerate the testing and release.
>>
>> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We will
>> prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before Test day.
>>
>> RC1 Link: http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/
>> 001442.html
>> Release Checklist: https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/
>> gluster-component-release-checklist
>>
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Aravinda and Pranith
>>
>>
> ___
> maintainers mailing list
> maintain...@gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-28 Thread Kaushal M 
I've finished my testing of GlusterD, and everything is working as
expected. I'm giving an ACK for GlusterD.

I've tested mainly the core of GlusterD and CLI. I've not tested
features like snapshots, tier, bit-rot, quota, ganesha etc.

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Kaushal M <kshlms...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Kaushal M <kshlms...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm continuing testing GlusterD for 3.9.0rc2. I wasted a lot of my
>> time earlier this morning testing 3.8.5 because of an oversight.
>>
>> I have one issue till now, the cluster.op-version defaults to 4.
>> This shouldn't be how it's supposed to be. It needs to be set to the
>> 39000 for 3.9.0.
>>
>> I'll send out a patch to fix this.
>
> I've opened a bug to track this.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389675
>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa
>> <rgowd...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks to "Tirumala Satya Prasad Desala" <tdes...@redhat.com>, we were able 
>>> to run tests for Plain distribute and didn't see any failures.
>>>
>>> Ack Plain distribute.
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>>> From: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" <kkeit...@redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Aravinda" <avish...@redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel" 
>>>> <gluster-devel@gluster.org>, "GlusterFS Maintainers"
>>>> <maintain...@gluster.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 8:51:36 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - 
>>>>Release 3.9
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ack on nfs-ganesha bits. Tentative ack on gnfs bits.
>>>>
>>>> Conditional ack on build, see:
>>>>http://review.gluster.org/15726
>>>>http://review.gluster.org/15733
>>>>http://review.gluster.org/15737
>>>>http://review.gluster.org/15743
>>>>
>>>> There will be backports to 3.9 of the last three soon. Timely reviews of
>>>> the last three will accelerate the availability of backports.
>>>>
>>>> On 10/26/2016 10:34 AM, Aravinda wrote:
>>>> > Gluster 3.9.0rc2 tarball is available here
>>>> > http://bits.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/src/glusterfs-3.9.0rc2.tar.gz
>>>> >
>>>> > regards
>>>> > Aravinda
>>>> >
>>>> > On Tuesday 25 October 2016 04:12 PM, Aravinda wrote:
>>>> >> Hi,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
>>>> >> help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
>>>> >> fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
>>>> >> day to accelerate the testing and release.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
>>>> >> will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
>>>> >> Test day.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> RC1 Link:
>>>> >> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
>>>> >> Release Checklist:
>>>> >> https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-component-release-checklist
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thanks and Regards
>>>> >> Aravinda and Pranith
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > ___
>>>> > maintainers mailing list
>>>> > maintain...@gluster.org
>>>> > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>>> Gluster-devel@gluster.org
>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>>
>>> ___
>>> maintainers mailing list
>>> maintain...@gluster.org
>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-28 Thread Kaushal M 
I'm continuing testing GlusterD for 3.9.0rc2. I wasted a lot of my
time earlier this morning testing 3.8.5 because of an oversight.

I have one issue till now, the cluster.op-version defaults to 4.
This shouldn't be how it's supposed to be. It needs to be set to the
39000 for 3.9.0.

I'll send out a patch to fix this.

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa
<rgowd...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Thanks to "Tirumala Satya Prasad Desala" <tdes...@redhat.com>, we were able 
> to run tests for Plain distribute and didn't see any failures.
>
> Ack Plain distribute.
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" <kkeit...@redhat.com>
>> To: "Aravinda" <avish...@redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel" 
>> <gluster-devel@gluster.org>, "GlusterFS Maintainers"
>> <maintain...@gluster.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 8:51:36 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday -   
>>  Release 3.9
>>
>>
>> Ack on nfs-ganesha bits. Tentative ack on gnfs bits.
>>
>> Conditional ack on build, see:
>>http://review.gluster.org/15726
>>http://review.gluster.org/15733
>>http://review.gluster.org/15737
>>http://review.gluster.org/15743
>>
>> There will be backports to 3.9 of the last three soon. Timely reviews of
>> the last three will accelerate the availability of backports.
>>
>> On 10/26/2016 10:34 AM, Aravinda wrote:
>> > Gluster 3.9.0rc2 tarball is available here
>> > http://bits.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/src/glusterfs-3.9.0rc2.tar.gz
>> >
>> > regards
>> > Aravinda
>> >
>> > On Tuesday 25 October 2016 04:12 PM, Aravinda wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
>> >> help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
>> >> fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
>> >>
>> >> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
>> >> day to accelerate the testing and release.
>> >>
>> >> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
>> >> will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
>> >> Test day.
>> >>
>> >> RC1 Link:
>> >> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
>> >> Release Checklist:
>> >> https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-component-release-checklist
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks and Regards
>> >> Aravinda and Pranith
>> >>
>> >
>> > ___
>> > maintainers mailing list
>> > maintain...@gluster.org
>> > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>>
>> ___
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel@gluster.org
>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>
> ___
> maintainers mailing list
> maintain...@gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-28 Thread Raghavendra Gowdappa 
Thanks to "Tirumala Satya Prasad Desala" <tdes...@redhat.com>, we were able to 
run tests for Plain distribute and didn't see any failures.

Ack Plain distribute.

- Original Message -
> From: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" <kkeit...@redhat.com>
> To: "Aravinda" <avish...@redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel" 
> <gluster-devel@gluster.org>, "GlusterFS Maintainers"
> <maintain...@gluster.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 8:51:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday -
> Release 3.9
> 
> 
> Ack on nfs-ganesha bits. Tentative ack on gnfs bits.
> 
> Conditional ack on build, see:
>http://review.gluster.org/15726
>http://review.gluster.org/15733
>http://review.gluster.org/15737
>http://review.gluster.org/15743
> 
> There will be backports to 3.9 of the last three soon. Timely reviews of
> the last three will accelerate the availability of backports.
> 
> On 10/26/2016 10:34 AM, Aravinda wrote:
> > Gluster 3.9.0rc2 tarball is available here
> > http://bits.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/src/glusterfs-3.9.0rc2.tar.gz
> >
> > regards
> > Aravinda
> >
> > On Tuesday 25 October 2016 04:12 PM, Aravinda wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
> >> help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
> >> fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
> >>
> >> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
> >> day to accelerate the testing and release.
> >>
> >> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
> >> will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
> >> Test day.
> >>
> >> RC1 Link:
> >> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
> >> Release Checklist:
> >> https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-component-release-checklist
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks and Regards
> >> Aravinda and Pranith
> >>
> >
> > ___
> > maintainers mailing list
> > maintain...@gluster.org
> > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> 
> ___
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel@gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> 
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-27 Thread Kaleb S. KEITHLEY 


Ack on nfs-ganesha bits. Tentative ack on gnfs bits.

Conditional ack on build, see:
  http://review.gluster.org/15726
  http://review.gluster.org/15733
  http://review.gluster.org/15737
  http://review.gluster.org/15743

There will be backports to 3.9 of the last three soon. Timely reviews of 
the last three will accelerate the availability of backports.


On 10/26/2016 10:34 AM, Aravinda wrote:

Gluster 3.9.0rc2 tarball is available here
http://bits.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/src/glusterfs-3.9.0rc2.tar.gz

regards
Aravinda

On Tuesday 25 October 2016 04:12 PM, Aravinda wrote:

Hi,

Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
fixes to release Gluster 3.9.

In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
day to accelerate the testing and release.

Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
Test day.

RC1 Link:
http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
Release Checklist:
https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-component-release-checklist


Thanks and Regards
Aravinda and Pranith



___
maintainers mailing list
maintain...@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers


___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-27 Thread Aravinda 
Ack for Geo-replication and Events API features. No regressions found 
during testing, and verified all the bug fixes made for Release-3.9.


regards
Aravinda

On Wednesday 26 October 2016 08:04 PM, Aravinda wrote:

Gluster 3.9.0rc2 tarball is available here
http://bits.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/src/glusterfs-3.9.0rc2.tar.gz 



regards
Aravinda

On Tuesday 25 October 2016 04:12 PM, Aravinda wrote:

Hi,

Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need 
help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug 
fixes to release Gluster 3.9.


In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test 
day to accelerate the testing and release.


Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We 
will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before 
Test day.


RC1 Link: 
http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
Release Checklist: 
https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/gluster-component-release-checklist



Thanks and Regards
Aravinda and Pranith



___
maintainers mailing list
maintain...@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers


___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-26 Thread Niels de Vos 
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 01:11:26PM -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> On 10/25/2016 12:11 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 07:51:47AM -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> >> On 10/25/2016 06:46 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Aravinda  >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
> >>> help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
> >>> fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
> >>>
> >>> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
> >>> day to accelerate the testing and release.
> >>>
> >>> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
> >>> will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
> >>   ^^^
> >>> Test day.
> >>>
> >>> RC1 Link:
> >>> 
> >>> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I don't think testing RC1 would be ideal as 3.9 head has moved forward
> >>> with significant number of patches. I'd recommend of having an RC2 here.
> >>>
> >>
> >> BTW, please tag RC2 as 3.9.0rc2 (versus 3.9rc2).  It makes building
> >> packages for Fedora much easier.
> >>
> >> I know you were following what was done for 3.8rcX. That was a pain. :-}
> > 
> > Can you explain what the problem is with 3.9rc2 and 3.9.0? The huge
> > advantage is that 3.9.0 is seen as a version update to 3.9rc2. When
> > 3.9.0rc2 is used, 3.9.0 is *not* an update for that, and rc2 packages
> > will stay installed until 3.9.1 is released...
> > 
> > You can check this easily with the rpmdev-vercmp command:
> > 
> >$ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9.0rc2 3.9.0
> >3.9.0rc2 > 3.9.0
> >$ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9rc2 3.9.0
> >3.9rc2 < 3.9.0
> 
> Those aren't really very realistic RPM NVRs IMO.
> 
> > 
> > So, at least for RPM packaging, 3.9rc2 is recommended, and 3.9.0rc2 is
> > problematic.
> 
> That's not the only thing recommended.
> 
> Last I knew, one of several things that are recommended is, e.g.,
> 3.9.0-0.2rc2; 3.9.0-1 > 3.9.0-0.2rc2.

Yes, we can add a 0. in the release field of the RPMs. That works fine,
but needs manual adoption of the .spec and is not done by the scripts we
have that get called from 'make -C extras/LinuxRPM glusterrpms'. This
means that RPMs build from the source (what developers do) and nightly
builds need to be treated differently.

> The RC (and {qa,alpha,beta}) packages (that I've) built for Fedora for
> several years have had NVRs in that form.
> 
> This scheme was what was suggested to me on the fedora-devel mailing
> list several years ago.

Indeed, and this is common for Fedora packages. Maybe we should adapt
that in our community RPMs too.

> When RCs are tagged as 3.9rc1, then I have to make non-trivial and
> counter-intuitive changes to the .spec file to build packages with NVRs
> like 3.9.0-0.XrcY. If they are tagged 3.9.0rc1 then the changes much
> more straight forward and much simpler.

Yes, that is, if you want to have the 3.9.0 version, and do not like to
take the 3.9rc2 version directly.

We probably should address the pre-release tagging in our build scripts,
so that the next release can easily be tagged v3.10.0rc1 or such.

Thanks!
Niels


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-25 Thread Kaleb S. KEITHLEY 
On 10/25/2016 12:11 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 07:51:47AM -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>> On 10/25/2016 06:46 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Aravinda >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
>>> help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
>>> fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
>>>
>>> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
>>> day to accelerate the testing and release.
>>>
>>> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
>>> will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
>>   ^^^
>>> Test day.
>>>
>>> RC1 Link:
>>> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think testing RC1 would be ideal as 3.9 head has moved forward
>>> with significant number of patches. I'd recommend of having an RC2 here.
>>>
>>
>> BTW, please tag RC2 as 3.9.0rc2 (versus 3.9rc2).  It makes building
>> packages for Fedora much easier.
>>
>> I know you were following what was done for 3.8rcX. That was a pain. :-}
> 
> Can you explain what the problem is with 3.9rc2 and 3.9.0? The huge
> advantage is that 3.9.0 is seen as a version update to 3.9rc2. When
> 3.9.0rc2 is used, 3.9.0 is *not* an update for that, and rc2 packages
> will stay installed until 3.9.1 is released...
> 
> You can check this easily with the rpmdev-vercmp command:
> 
>$ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9.0rc2 3.9.0
>3.9.0rc2 > 3.9.0
>$ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9rc2 3.9.0
>3.9rc2 < 3.9.0

Those aren't really very realistic RPM NVRs IMO.

> 
> So, at least for RPM packaging, 3.9rc2 is recommended, and 3.9.0rc2 is
> problematic.

That's not the only thing recommended.

Last I knew, one of several things that are recommended is, e.g.,
3.9.0-0.2rc2; 3.9.0-1 > 3.9.0-0.2rc2.

The RC (and {qa,alpha,beta}) packages (that I've) built for Fedora for
several years have had NVRs in that form.

This scheme was what was suggested to me on the fedora-devel mailing
list several years ago.

When RCs are tagged as 3.9rc1, then I have to make non-trivial and
counter-intuitive changes to the .spec file to build packages with NVRs
like 3.9.0-0.XrcY. If they are tagged 3.9.0rc1 then the changes much
more straight forward and much simpler.

-- 

Kaleb



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-25 Thread Niels de Vos 
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 07:51:47AM -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> On 10/25/2016 06:46 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Aravinda  > > wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
> > help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
> > fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
> > 
> > In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
> > day to accelerate the testing and release.
> > 
> > Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
> > will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
>   ^^^
> > Test day.
> > 
> > RC1 Link:
> > http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I don't think testing RC1 would be ideal as 3.9 head has moved forward
> > with significant number of patches. I'd recommend of having an RC2 here.
> > 
> 
> BTW, please tag RC2 as 3.9.0rc2 (versus 3.9rc2).  It makes building
> packages for Fedora much easier.
> 
> I know you were following what was done for 3.8rcX. That was a pain. :-}

Can you explain what the problem is with 3.9rc2 and 3.9.0? The huge
advantage is that 3.9.0 is seen as a version update to 3.9rc2. When
3.9.0rc2 is used, 3.9.0 is *not* an update for that, and rc2 packages
will stay installed until 3.9.1 is released...

You can check this easily with the rpmdev-vercmp command:

   $ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9.0rc2 3.9.0
   3.9.0rc2 > 3.9.0
   $ rpmdev-vercmp 3.9rc2 3.9.0
   3.9rc2 < 3.9.0

So, at least for RPM packaging, 3.9rc2 is recommended, and 3.9.0rc2 is
problematic.

Thanks,
Niels


> 
> 3.7 and 3.6 were all 3.X.0betaY or 3.X.0qaY.
> 
> If for some reason 3.9 doesn't get released soon, I'll need to package
> the RC to get 3.9 into Fedora 25 before its GA and having a packaging
> friendly tag will make it that much easier for me to get that done.
> 
> (See the community packaging matrix I sent to the mailing lists and/or
> at
> http://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Install-Guide/Community_Packages/)
> 
> N.B. This will serve as the email part of the RC tagging discussion
> action item I have.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Kaleb
> ___
> maintainers mailing list
> maintain...@gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-25 Thread Kaleb S. KEITHLEY 
On 10/25/2016 06:46 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Aravinda  > wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need
> help from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug
> fixes to release Gluster 3.9.
> 
> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test
> day to accelerate the testing and release.
> 
> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We
> will prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before
  ^^^
> Test day.
> 
> RC1 Link:
> http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/001442.html
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think testing RC1 would be ideal as 3.9 head has moved forward
> with significant number of patches. I'd recommend of having an RC2 here.
> 

BTW, please tag RC2 as 3.9.0rc2 (versus 3.9rc2).  It makes building
packages for Fedora much easier.

I know you were following what was done for 3.8rcX. That was a pain. :-}

3.7 and 3.6 were all 3.X.0betaY or 3.X.0qaY.

If for some reason 3.9 doesn't get released soon, I'll need to package
the RC to get 3.9 into Fedora 25 before its GA and having a packaging
friendly tag will make it that much easier for me to get that done.

(See the community packaging matrix I sent to the mailing lists and/or
at
http://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Install-Guide/Community_Packages/)

N.B. This will serve as the email part of the RC tagging discussion
action item I have.

Thanks.


-- 

Kaleb
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Gluster Test Thursday - Release 3.9

2016-10-25 Thread Atin Mukherjee 
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Aravinda  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Since Automated test framework for Gluster is in progress, we need help
> from Maintainers and developers to test the features and bug fixes to
> release Gluster 3.9.
>
> In last maintainers meeting Shyam shared an idea about having a Test day
> to accelerate the testing and release.
>
> Please participate in testing your component(s) on Oct 27, 2016. We will
> prepare the rc2 build by tomorrow and share the details before Test day.
>
> RC1 Link: http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/maintainers/2016-September/
> 001442.html


I don't think testing RC1 would be ideal as 3.9 head has moved forward with
significant number of patches. I'd recommend of having an RC2 here.


> Release Checklist: https://public.pad.fsfe.org/p/
> gluster-component-release-checklist
>
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Aravinda and Pranith
>
> ___
> maintainers mailing list
> maintain...@gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>



-- 

~ Atin (atinm)
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel