Hi Ceph,
TL;DR: If you have one day a week to work on the next Ceph stable releases [1]
your help would be most welcome.
In the past two months I spent a fair amount of time to better understand and
help backporting patches to the existing stable releases [2]. I'm developing
tools [3] to
Hi Yehuda,
A few issues related to rgw were backported to firefly[1]. They passed the rgw
suite[2]. Could you please take a look ?
Cheers
[1]
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3Afirefly+sort%3Aupdated-desc+label%3Argw
[2] http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11090#rgw
Hi Yehuda,
On 16/03/2015 22:47, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yehuda Sadeh yeh...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 2:28:09 PM
Subject: Firefly v0.80.10 backports
Hi,
A gentle reminder ;-)
Cheers
On 24/02/2015 18:10, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Sage,
QE approved
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/77dfbbaccfb5074899d02314a26cb9ac46a69106
for release in the https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/dumpling branch. The
release notes should now be written
of jobs. You can adapt the instructions from
http://dachary.org/?p=2204 to your local environment. All you need really is
the ability to run two virtual machines.
Cheers
Best regards,
Takeshi Miyamae
-Original Message-
From: Loic Dachary [mailto:l...@dachary.org]
Sent: Monday
Hi Ilya,
On 10/03/2015 08:19, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:32 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
Hi Andrew,
I successfully installed a 3.19 kernel (details at
http://dachary.org/?p=3594). It turns out that the loop module is compiled
in and defaults to having zero
Hi Danny,
On 10/03/2015 06:59, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Am 10.03.2015 um 00:06 schrieb Loic Dachary:
On 09/03/2015 18:31, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Hi Loic,
this one is a tricky one. I didn't find a smooth/automatic
solution yet.
This seems to work:
git checkout master git merge --no-ff origin
...@redhat.com
To: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 9:33:44 AM
Subject: Re: giant integration branch for v0.87.1 ready for QE
I have completed suites execution on giant branch (v0.87.1 RC)
All results are summarized in http
.0, client.0]
kernel:
branch: testing
tasks:
- interactive:
Use teuthology-lock —list-targets to get the connection information for you
newly locked node and add that to your yaml.
Best,
Andrew
On Mar 8, 2015, at 7:50 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
mailto:l
Hi Danny,
As of now, git checkout master ; git merge origin/hammer gets a conflict on
gmock
When we last discussed it you found that git merge -m 1 was a solution. But I'm
not sure I fully understand the consequences.
Cheers
--
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
signature.asc
Hi Ken,
Thanks for the detailed explanation. I updated
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/3871 accordingly (I think ;-)
Cheers
On 09/03/2015 18:46, Ken Dreyer wrote:
On 03/07/2015 01:03 PM, Loic Dachary wrote:
which I eventually found in [rhel6-server-optional] as installed
with http
.0, client.0]
kernel:
branch: testing
tasks:
- interactive:
Use teuthology-lock —list-targets to get the connection information for you
newly locked node and add that to your yaml.
Best,
Andrew
On Mar 8, 2015, at 7:50 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
mailto:l
the changes im master and ignore changes from hammer)
Do you know what changes have been done in hammer in src/gmock ?
git commit
You may have to check if the result is what's intended.
Danny
Am 09.03.2015 um 15:18 schrieb Loic Dachary:
Hi Danny,
As of now, git checkout master ; git
issues.
Ian R. Colle
Global Director
of Software Engineering
Red Hat (Inktank is now part of Red Hat!)
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ircolle
http://www.twitter.com/ircolle
Cell: +1.303.601.7713
Email: ico...@redhat.com
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
Hi Andrew,
After successfully locking a centos 6.5 VPS in the community lab with
teuthology-lock --lock-many 1 --owner l...@dachary.org --machine-type vps
--os-type centos --os-version 6.5
it turns out that it has a 2.6.32 kernel by default. A more recent kernel is
required to run the
Hi Ian Zack,
I'm addressing you today because you have admin rights on
http://tracker.ceph.com/. When working on the next stable release for Ceph, I
find convenient to use a custom query that shows only what needs to be
backported, grouped by project and sorted by severity. These queries are
Hi Ken,
When trying to compile Ceph on a fresh rhel 6.5 provisioned in a VPS via
teuthology, I missed the following:
diff --git a/ceph.spec.in b/ceph.spec.in
index d284844..4c80cfe 100644
--- a/ceph.spec.in
+++ b/ceph.spec.in
@@ -45,7 +45,6 @@ BuildRequires:gdbm
BuildRequires: hdparm
Hi Danny,
On 06/03/2015 00:08, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Am 05.03.2015 um 22:14 schrieb Loic Dachary:
Hi Danny,
Unfortunately it looks like submodule deinit requires a version of
git that's not in precise.
http://gitbuilder.sepia.ceph.com/gitbuilder-ceph-deb-precise-amd64-basic/log.cgi?log
Hi,
The make check bot is back.
If you're curious, here is the corresponding fix
https://github.com/dachary/ceph/commit/3a8b8284ddd17ad5c6e27347433cdde6744d0737
Cheers
On 06/03/2015 03:00, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi again,
The gitbuilders are fixed as well as master. The make check bot
Hi Danny,
On 06/03/2015 00:14, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Am 05.03.2015 um 19:09 schrieb Loic Dachary:
Hi Danny,
The build of master shows linkage errors:
http://gitbuilder.sepia.ceph.com/gitbuilder-ceph-deb-trusty-amd64-basic/log.cgi?log=60e2bec73ff3970e0c6b44250ce465e6c5dde56f
error: dpkg
Hi Ceph,
In the past 24 hours gitbuilder did compile ceph but did not generate the
expected packages. This translated into 404 when trying to run teuthology tests
targeting the corresponding branch. It should be fixed now but still testing.
More information at
Hi Danny,
Unfortunately it looks like submodule deinit requires a version of git that's
not in precise.
http://gitbuilder.sepia.ceph.com/gitbuilder-ceph-deb-precise-amd64-basic/log.cgi?log=9a0ac62a9cf27573d5345143a3bc6c6b737031db
+ git submodule deinit -f .
error: pathspec 'deinit' did
Hi Danny,
The build of master shows linkage errors:
http://gitbuilder.sepia.ceph.com/gitbuilder-ceph-deb-trusty-amd64-basic/log.cgi?log=60e2bec73ff3970e0c6b44250ce465e6c5dde56f
error: dpkg-shlibdeps: couldn't find library libgmock_main.so.0 needed by
Hi again,
The gitbuilders are fixed as well as master. The make check bot will be back in
a few hours.
Cheers
On 05/03/2015 19:00, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Ceph,
The make check bot that runs on pull requests is on pause until the
gitbuilder ( http://ceph.com/gitbuilder.cgi ) upgrade
-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub yeh...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2015 8:44:22 AM
Subject: Re: rgw and the next firefly release
Hi Yehuda,
On 02/03/2015 17:08
Hi Yuri,
The firefly branch for v0.80.9 as found at
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly has been approved by Greg, Yehuda,
Josh and Sam and is ready for QE.
For the record, the head is
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/edd37e39d155fbe36012008df3d49e33ec3117cc
and the details of
Hi Sage,
The firefly branch for v0.80.9 as found at
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly has been approved by Greg, Yehuda,
Josh and Sam. It is not expected to change significantly while QE conducts
tests and release notes can be worked on in the meantime.
Cheers
--
Loïc Dachary,
/?status=fail
Great. I'll figure out the jq expression to create a onliner. We're getting
close !
Cheers
Zack
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Zack Cerza z...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Saturday, February 28
Hi Yehuda,
On 02/03/2015 17:08, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub yeh...@redhat.com
To: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 8:55:42 AM
Subject: Re: rgw
Hi Greg,
On 01/03/2015 06:00, Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
Hi Greg,
The fs teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back with three
failures : http
Hi Zack,
Is there a way to ask paddles / pulpito ( http://pulpito.ceph.com/ ) for the
list of failed/dead jobs in a given suite ? Here is a fiction example:
$ paddles --failed-or-dead
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-28_11:45:50-fs-firefly-backports---basic-multi/
Hi Sam,
The rados teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back with one
failure (unreadable crash from ceph-osd http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10485).
The details of the run is at
Hi Yehuda,
The rados teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back green
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-27_18:04:18-rgw-firefly-backports---basic-multi/.
Do you think it is ready for QE to start their own round
On 28/02/2015 03:48, Patrick McGarry wrote:
Yeah, unfortunately some accounts are just not working. There doesn't
seem to be a discernible pattern to which ones work and which do not.
Before the next CDS I'll be migrating to mediawiki
Great move ! :-)
so we have complete
control.
Hi,
A teuthology rados run (
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-qa-suite/tree/master/suites/rados ) completed with
five dead jobs out of 693. They failed because of DNS errors and I'd like to
re-run them. Ideally I could do something like:
teuthology-schedule --run
Hi Greg,
The fs teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports came back with three
failures : http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10641#fs. Do you think it is ready
for QE to start their own round of testing ?
Cheers
P.S. I'll
out.
Job scheduled with name
loic-2015-02-28_15:58:07-rados-firefly-backports---basic-multi and ID 783150
Creates the
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-28_15:58:07-rados-firefly-backports---basic-multi/
run with just 5 jobs.
On 28/02/2015 11:28, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi,
A teuthology rados
Hi Ceph,
In the past few weeks I issues in the tracker of the Ceph project to update the
progress of the ongoing effort to publish stable point releases (i.e.
backports) at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10640. It started somewhat messy
but turned out to be a convenient point of reference,
Hi Josh,
The rbd teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/firefly-backports is green. The details of
the run is at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10641#rbd. Note that today's run
were to repeat the jobs that failed because of environmental
On 28/02/2015 16:47, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
Loic
In case you want to add some comments - http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10945
Done thanks !
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Saturday
: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yehuda Sadeh yeh...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 2:44:07 AM
Subject: rgw and the next firefly release
Hi Yehuda,
The rados teuthology suite for the next firefly release as found in
https
On 27/02/2015 17:29, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Ilya Dryomov idryo...@gmail.com
Cc: Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub yeh...@redhat.com, Sage Weil
sw...@redhat.com, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 5
On 27/02/2015 13:59, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 27/02/2015 00:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Sage Weil sw...@redhat.com, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
On 27/02/2015 14:49, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 27/02/2015 13:59, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 27/02/2015 00:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote
On 27/02/2015 23:47, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Loic Dachary wrote:
On 27/02/2015 13:59, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 27/02/2015 00:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l
On 27/02/2015 00:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Sage Weil sw...@redhat.com, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 3:38:31 PM
Subject: Re: ceph versions
Hi Sage,
I prefer Option D because
Hi Ceph,
ceph-workbench is a command line script that is designed to bind together
various scripts I'm using when working on Ceph. A while back I thought it would
be a good idea to have such a swiss knife to match the needs of all Ceph
developers, instead of scripts scattered in various places
Hi Sage,
I prefer Option D because it's self explanatory. We could also drop the names.
I became attached to them but they are confusing to the new users who is
required to remember that firefly is 0.80, giant is 0.87 etc.
Cheers
On 27/02/2015 00:12, Sage Weil wrote:
-- Option D -- labeled
To: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Sage Weil
s...@redhat.com, Tamil Muthamizhan tmuth...@redhat.com, Zack Cerza
z...@redhat.com, Sandon Van Ness svann...@redhat.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 9:38:19 AM
Subject: Re: dumpling integration branch
;-)
My 2cts.
Varada
-Original Message-
From: Loic Dachary [mailto:l...@dachary.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 9:57 PM
To: Somnath Roy; Varada Kari; Ceph Development
Subject: Re: Adding a proprietary key value store to CEPH
Hi,
On 24/02/2015 17:13, Somnath Roy wrote
Hi,
I proposed a blueprint to add generic plugin support to Ceph for the upcoming
Ceph Developer Summit that will be held next week:
https://wiki.ceph.com/Planning/Blueprints/Infernalis/Generic_support_for_plugins_installation_and_upgrade
It's a rough draft still and I've created an
Hi,
I'm curious about the reasons why the key/value store you mention is not
published as Free Software. Is it because it implements a proprietary interface
to a specific hardware ? Because it has additional functionalities comparied to
rocksdb etc. ? Because it performs better under some
Hi Ceph,
On february 10th I wrongfully marked some issues as resolved in the Ceph
issue tracker. Two of them were discovered later and people lost precious time
before finding out they were incorrectly marked as resolved. Today I went over
all the issues and found one more:
[mailto:ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Loic Dachary
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 6:30 AM
To: Varada Kari; Ceph Development
Subject: Re: Adding a proprietary key value store to CEPH
Hi,
I'm curious about the reasons why the key/value store you mention is not
published as Free
Hi Sage,
QE approved
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/77dfbbaccfb5074899d02314a26cb9ac46a69106
for release in the https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/dumpling branch. The
release notes should now be written based on the content of the issues and pull
requests mentioned here
Hi,
QE approved
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/4178e32dd085adeead84fb168ab8a8a121256259
for release. The release notes should now be written based on the content of
the issues and pull requests mentioned here
http://workbench.dachary.org/ceph/ceph-backports/wikis/giant#already-merged
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yuri Weinstein ywein...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Sage Weil
s...@redhat.com, Tamil Muthamizhan tmuth...@redhat.com, Zack Cerza
z...@redhat.com, Sandon Van Ness svann...@redhat.com
Sent: Thursday
Hi,
On 16/02/2015 08:37, Miyamae, Takeshi wrote:
Dear Loic,
Thank you for your help on the pull request of SHEC last week.
We believe that marking experimental feature on SHEC was inevitable and
the way to restrict the feature is proper.
By the way, could you let us know what are the
BTW: When I re-run suites now for validation I use -s named_branch arg
in the command line. Maybe I should be using SHA ref instead? I never
tried this way, but guessing it should work, what do you think?
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
On 14/02/2015 08:56, Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
Hi Greg,
I'm curious to know how you handle the flow of mails from QA runs. Here is a
wild guess:
* from time to time check that the nightlies run the suites that should
the
timing of the tagging of the release.
Cheers
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Gregory Farnum g...@gregs42.com
To: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 11:56:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Ceph-qa] 1 hung, 11 passed
On 14/02/2015 22:53, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Yuri,
On 14/02/2015 17:22, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
Yeah. Well, the last run alone isn't so important; we want to see a
string of clean runs because a lot of issues aren't reproduced in
every run.
My hope was that we can see all green results
Hi Greg,
I'm curious to know how you handle the flow of mails from QA runs. Here is a
wild guess:
* from time to time check that the nightlies run the suites that should be run
* read the ceph-qa reports daily
* for each failed job, either relate it to an issue or create one or declare it
them in the Octo, since we already started there, if you
agree ?
Sure :-)
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Yuri Weinstein ywein...@redhat.com
To: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Sage Weil
s...@redhat.com, Tamil Muthamizhan tmuth
Please ignore this mail, I confused the two threads and you already answered
with https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/3716. Great :-)
On 12/02/2015 10:13, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi,
It turned out to be a problem with tests and uninitialized memory which I was
able to fix with
https
Hi,
Would you have time to document the shec erasure code plugin ? A page similar
to http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/erasure-code-isa/ for the
shec erasure code plugin should be linked to
http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/erasure-code/. The
documentation is
. It seems it works well.
Is that enough for your job?
Best regards,
Takeshi Miyamae
-Original Message-
From: ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Loic Dachary
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 9:28 PM
To: Miyamae, Takeshi/宮前 剛
Cc
-Original Message-
From: ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Loic Dachary
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 9:28 PM
To: Miyamae, Takeshi/宮前 剛
Cc: Ceph Development
Subject: SHEC updates to the erasure code non regression corpus
Hi
Hi,
As of today the SHEC unit test fail as described at
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10839. Can you reproduce the failure locally ?
I'm not sure why it happens now and not yesterday. I'll bisect the failure down
to the guilty commit but it would be great if you could confirm that you also
://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/giant which is not ready for testing.
For the record, the head is
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/78c71b9200da5e7d832ec58765478404d31ae6b5
Cheers
On 10/02/2015 18:20, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Yuri,
The giant integration branch for v0.87.1 as found at
https
On 11/02/2015 18:27, Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
Hi Ceph,
Yesterday the dumpling giant backport integration branches were approved
by Yehuda, Sam and Josh and were handed over to QE. An interesting
discussion followed
Hi Yuri,
The giant-backports pull requests were merged into
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/giant which is not ready for testing.
For the record, the head is
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/78c71b9200da5e7d832ec58765478404d31ae6b5
Cheers
On 10/02/2015 18:20, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi
miss them). However, if you need
my input on a specific ticket feel free to ask.
Thanks !
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yuri Weinstein ywein...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 9
Hi,
I've updated the erasure code corpus that verifies the encoding of erasure
coded chunks do not change over time with a version that includes the SHEC
erasure code plugin.
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-erasure-code-corpus/commit/498b0102955b747813182734e13e75195f2a02a9
From now on it will
Hi Yuri,
The dumpling integration branch
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/dumpling-backports is ready for Josh and
Sam and we are expecting approval from Yehuda (the details are here
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10560).
The giant integration branch
Hi Yehuda,
The rgw teuthology suite for the next giant release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/giant-backports came back (see
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-02_23:56:11-rgw-giant-backports---basic-multi)
with one environmental error
!
Cheers
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yuri Weinstein yuri.weinst...@inktank.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 7:25:55 AM
Subject: dumpling giant backports update
Hi Yuri
Hi Yuri,
The giant integration branch for v0.87.1 as found at
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/giant-backports has been approved by
Yehuda, Josh and Sam and is ready for QE.
For the record, the head is
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/6b08a729540c61f3c8b15c5a3ce9382634bf800c
Cheers
if this is not what has to be done.
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yuri Weinstein ywein...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 9:05:31 AM
Subject: dumpling integration branch for v0.67.12 ready for QE
if this is not what has to be done.
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yuri Weinstein ywein...@redhat.com
Cc: Ceph Development ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 9:05:31 AM
Subject: dumpling integration branch for v0.67.12 ready
19:37, Sage Weil wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015, Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 10/02/2015 18:29, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
On 10/02/2015 18:19, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
Loic,
The only difference between options if we run suits on merged
On 10/02/2015 19:25, Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 10/02/2015 18:29, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
On 10/02/2015 18:19, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
Loic,
The only difference between options if we run suits on merged dumpling vs
wrote:
Great!
As soon as it's merged I will schedule suite to run as listed somewhere below
...
dumpling with higher priority and then giant.
Thx
YuriW
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Sage Weil s...@newdream.net, Gregory Farnum g...@gregs42.com
Cc
The giant backports have not yet been merged. Dumpling is good though.
On 10/02/2015 20:38, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
I am planning to schedule suites with high priority in the Octo and disable
temporarily schedule in crontab today until validations are finished.
Why the high priority ?
Cheers
Hi Josh,
The rbd teuthology suite for the next giant release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/giant-backports came back (see
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-02_23:28:17-rbd-giant-backports---basic-multi)
with one ceph-qa-suite error which was fixed (see
Thanks for the confirmation :-)
On 10/02/2015 01:08, Josh Durgin wrote:
On 02/09/2015 12:27 PM, Jason Dillaman wrote:
I would agree with your assessment that
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10560#teuthology-runs-on-3944c77c404c4a05886fe8276d5d0dd7e4f20410-6-february
sounds like a repeat of
Hi,
I discovered https://github.com/noahdesu/go-ceph today :-) It would be useful
in the context of a Ceph volume driver for docker ( see
https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/10661
https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/8484 ).
Are you a docker user by any chance ?
--
Loïc Dachary,
Hi Jason,
Your backport of http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/9854 at
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/3655 was added to the dumpling-backports
branch and the RBD suite run came back with one error.
-on-b5e871fe027db3b25f9129ae3e5b2326a89467c5-6-february
Do you think rgw is ready for the next dumpling point release ?
Cheers
On 06/02/2015 00:07, Loic Dachary wrote:
Thanks !
On 05/02/2015 23:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Yehuda Sadeh yeh
On 06/01/2015 12:15, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi,
I tried various things to update tracker.ceph.com from the command line but
failed. The best result I have is the following:
cat /tmp/a.xml
issue
id10281/id
subjectfirefly: make check fails on fedora 20 (1)/subject
custom_fields
Hi Jason,
Thanks for taking time to check :-)
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/9854 is indeed in the list of issues that need
backporting for dumpling:
http://workbench.dachary.org/ceph/ceph-backports/wikis/dumpling#issues-that-need-backporting
so is http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10299. I'm
Hi Jason Josh,
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10773 is the last unresolved issue for the next
dumpling point release. I tried to collect information about the problem but
I'm not sure if it should be a blocker or not. I suspect it's not but ... what
do you think ?
For the record, the commits
Hi Sam,
The rados teuthology suite for the next dumpling release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/dumpling-backports came back green
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-03_14:41:24-rados-dumpling-backports---basic-multi/.
Do you think it is ready for QE to start their own
Hi Yehuda,
The rados teuthology suite for the next dumpling release as found in
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/dumpling-backports came back green
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-03_14:46:09-rgw-dumpling-backports---basic-multi/.
Do you think it is ready for QE to start their own
Hi,
The bot that runs make check on pull requests and posts the results (see
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/3529#issuecomment-72508279 for instance)
broke yesterday because the next branch disappeared. The problem was fixed
and the bot is back to work.
Cheers
--
Loïc Dachary, Artisan
Hi Ceph,
A month ago the following workflow was posted and I began to implement it.
0. Developer follows normal process to land PR to master. Once complete and
ticket is marked Pending Backport this process initiates.
There were a few inconsistencies but they were easy to fix. When the tag
Hi,
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-02_23:28:17-rbd-giant-backports---basic-multi/736186/
shows
http://sentry.ceph.com/sepia/teuthology/search?q=2d8c37aa0f2049968de11fa83fbd8c90
which requires an account. I created one (email l...@dachary.org) and kindly
ask if permissions could be
On 02/02/2015 22:14, Janne Grunau wrote:
On 2015-01-10 18:54:43 +0100, Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Kevin Janne,
The test gf_unit 16 A -1 -m SPLIT 16 4 -r ALTMAP - fails on the current
gf-complete master. The first commit where it fails is
commit 474010a91d35fef5ca7dea77205b6a5c7e68c3e9
Hi Yuri,
There is one remaining issue in the dumpling backports (the details are here
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10560).
The giant integration branch has been updated today with all the pending pull
requests (rgw in particular) and the rbd, rados and rgw suites scheduled (the
details are
Hi,
http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-01-29_15:39:38-rbd-dumpling-backports---basic-multi/730029/
hangs on dumpling and got killed after two days.
Although workloads/rbd_fsx_cache_writethrough.yaml was running with the
thrasher, it does not seem to be related to
401 - 500 of 1157 matches
Mail list logo
