On 12/17/2014 01:01 PM, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote:
On 12/17/2014 12:56 PM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
I was looking into a Coverity issue (CID 1228603) in GlusterFS.
I sent a patch[1] before I fully understood why this was an issue.
After searching around in the internet for explanations, I
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 02:26:55AM -0500, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
I was looking into a Coverity issue (CID 1228603) in GlusterFS.
I sent a patch[1] before I fully understood why this was an issue.
After searching around in the internet for explanations, I identified that
the core issue
As long as we can precisely 'teach' Coverity our usage patterns that are known
to be correct, it is OK to address a family of issues. If there is an advertised
interface in Coverity to do that then we should be able to 'undo' it as well.
OTOH, closing a bunch of similar looking (but incorrectly
Hello
Any chance http://review.gluster.org/9071 gets merged (and
http://review.gluster.org/9084 for release-3.6)? It has been waiting for
review for more than a month now.
This is the remaining of a fix that has been partially done in
http://review.gluster.org/8933, and that one has been
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 04:16:10PM +0530, RAGHAVENDRA TALUR wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:48 AM, J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org wrote:
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 07:24:52PM +0530, Soumya Koduri wrote:
On 12/12/2014 11:06 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
Hi,
I started to look into
Thanks Lala and Niels, I marked the issue as intentional with a comment.
FWIW, this exercise inspired me to refactor the code near the false positive
site. For those interested in reviewing, http://review.gluster.org/9288
~kp
- Original Message -
As long as we can precisely 'teach'
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 01:54:09PM +0530, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
On 12/17/2014 01:01 PM, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote:
On 12/17/2014 12:56 PM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
I was looking into a Coverity issue (CID 1228603) in GlusterFS.
I sent a patch[1] before I fully understood why this was
- Original Message -
From: Niels de Vos nde...@redhat.com
To: Atin Mukherjee amukh...@redhat.com
Cc: Gluster Devel gluster-devel@gluster.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 2:21:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Help needed with Coverity - How to remove
tainted_data_argument?
On 12/17/2014 09:26 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 02:26:55AM -0500, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
I was looking into a Coverity issue (CID 1228603) in GlusterFS.
I sent a patch[1] before I fully understood why this was an issue.
After searching around in the internet for
On Wednesday 17 December 2014 02:21 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
Hello
Any chance http://review.gluster.org/9071 gets merged (and
http://review.gluster.org/9084 for release-3.6)? It has been waiting for
review for more than a month now.
I tried to push the above patch. But it failed with merge
Just to consider all possibilities...
Current architecture needs to create all directory structure on all
bricks, and has the big problem that each directory in each brick will
store the files in different order and with different d_off values.
This is a serious scalability issue and have
On 12/17/2014 11:29 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:24:46AM +0100, Xavier Hernandez wrote:
I think the root cause of this particular problem is a pattern like this:
GF_ASSERT(type = x);
array[type] = y
I think there are several places where this pattern is used.
Raghavendra Bhat rab...@redhat.com wrote:
I tried to push the above patch. But it failed with merge conflict. Can
you please rebase and sent it?
Done, it is passing regression tests right now.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.org
On 12/15/2014 10:12 PM, Deepak Shetty wrote:
Nice effort
It would be good to mention how gluster is integrated for each of the
projects... Fuse, libgfapi etc?
For the ovirt case, it's used to store vm images, not VMs as u mention.
Also in ovirt, we support using Gluster in fuse and libgfapi
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:18:47PM +0530, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote:
On 12/03/2014 02:17 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
Hi all,
I've just started a page that contains some applications that have
support for Gluster. The page is far from complete, but this is a wiki
so I hope others are interested to
On 12/17/2014 12:46 PM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
- Original Message -
On 12/17/2014 11:29 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:24:46AM +0100, Xavier Hernandez wrote:
I think the root cause of this particular problem is a pattern like this:
GF_ASSERT(type =
Hello,
If you plan on updating the operating-version value of GlusterFS, please
either ping me (@purpleidea) or send a patch to puppet-gluster [1].
Patches are 4 line yaml files, and you don't need any knowledge of
puppet or yaml to do so.
Example:
+# gluster/data/versions/3.6.yaml
+---
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 08:40:18AM -0500, James wrote:
Hello,
If you plan on updating the operating-version value of GlusterFS, please
either ping me (@purpleidea) or send a patch to puppet-gluster [1].
Patches are 4 line yaml files, and you don't need any knowledge of
puppet or yaml to do
(D) Secondary volumes may not be started and stopped by the user.
Instead, a secondary volume is automatically started or stopped along
with its primary.
Wouldn't it help in some cases to have secondary volumes running while
primary is not running? Some form of maintenance activity.
Hi,
I submitted a patch to add unittest support for
glusterfs/geo-replication python code.
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/9290/
As of now unittest coverage is 0% and their are pep8 issues in georep.
This patch only adds unittest framework.
Please review, once merged we will start adding
Hi,
In fuse I saw, that as part of resolving a inode, an explicit lookup is
done on it if the inode is found to be linked via readdirp (At the time
of linking in readdirp, fuse sets a flag in the inode context). It is
done because, many xlators such as afr depend upon lookup call for many
On 12/17/2014 07:39 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 08:40:18AM -0500, James wrote:
Hello,
If you plan on updating the operating-version value of GlusterFS, please
either ping me (@purpleidea) or send a patch to puppet-gluster [1].
Patches are 4 line yaml files, and you don't
- Original Message -
From: Raghavendra Bhat rab...@redhat.com
To: Gluster Devel gluster-devel@gluster.org
Cc: Anand Avati aav...@redhat.com
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 12:31:41 PM
Subject: [Gluster-devel] explicit lookup of inods linked via readdirp
Hi,
In fuse I saw,
In that case, I should send a note as the op-version has been bumped
for the master branch.
Please take note,
The operating-version for the master branch has been bumped to
'30700', which is aligned with the next release of GlusterFS, 3.7.
~kaushal
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Lalatendu
+Pranith
- Original Message -
From: Raghavendra Gowdappa rgowd...@redhat.com
To: Raghavendra Bhat rab...@redhat.com
Cc: Anand Avati aav...@redhat.com, Gluster Devel
gluster-devel@gluster.org
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 12:58:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] explicit lookup
There are two patches about how we can organise the developer docs
inside the GlusterFS source code. These patches needs more set of eyes
and also please put your thoughts here or in the patches.
[1] http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8348/
[2] http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8827/
Thanks,
Lala
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 03:21:24PM -0500, Jeff Darcy wrote:
Is there *any* case, not even necessarily involving conservative merge,
where it would be harmful to propagate the latest ctime/mtime for any
replica of a directory?
In case of conservative merge, the problem vanish on its own anyway:
27 matches
Mail list logo
