Ah, thanks, I didn't realize old versions were moved to
https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/old-releases/. Moving
old repos does break apt updates on clients which isn't great for wide
deployments, but I suppose it does force end users to upgrade to a
supported version.
On Thu, Aug
Just wanted to alert Gluster devs that the 3.9 Debian repository seems to
have recently disappeared, e.g. this source
deb
http://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/3.9/3.9.0/Debian/jessie/apt
jessie main
no longer works and breaks apt-get updates for servers configured with it.
Up until a few days ago they haven't been moved.
I suppose I should've warned people. I guess I consider them warned now.
I can put them back if enough people think I should, but for the moment
I'm inclined to keep it this way.
On 08/17/2017 03:27 PM, Shane StClair wrote:
Ah, thanks, I
On 08/17/2017 03:01 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
3.9 was a STM release and reached ...
... EOL several months ago.
The old repos are still there.
https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/old-releases/3.9/
On 08/17/2017 02:56 PM, Shane StClair wrote:
Just wanted to alert Gluster
3.9 is EOL several months ago.
The old repos are still there.
https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/old-releases/3.9/
On 08/17/2017 02:56 PM, Shane StClair wrote:
Just wanted to alert Gluster devs that the 3.9 Debian repository seems
to have recently disappeared, e.g. this
GlusterFS Coverity covscan results are available from
http://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/static-analysis/master/glusterfs-coverity/2017-08-17-3998c283
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Mohammed Rafi K C
wrote:
>
>
> On 08/17/2017 05:07 PM, Nigel Babu wrote:
>
> This change is taking the first step towards implementing those ideas. One
> of the major blockers to implementing them was that it was difficult to
> grant easy
On 08/17/2017 05:07 PM, Nigel Babu wrote:
> This change is taking the first step towards implementing those ideas.
> One of the major blockers to implementing them was that it was
> difficult to grant easy access to change the hook. Granting production
> access to Gerrit is next to impossible
Thanks Manikandan for your quick update. As nigel pointed out in the
previous mail, we can resume the work once the ongoing task has
finished. So hopefully we can finish this time.
Regards
Rafi KC
On 08/17/2017 05:08 PM, Manikandan Selvaganesh wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We did work on the same and
On 08/17/2017 07:36 AM, Amar Tumballi wrote:
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Raghavendra Talur > wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Ilan Schwarts > wrote:
> Hi,
> So this is a bit
This change is taking the first step towards implementing those ideas. One
of the major blockers to implementing them was that it was difficult to
grant easy access to change the hook. Granting production access to Gerrit
is next to impossible unless you really know what you're doing.
We'll not
Hi all,
We did work on the same and here is the BZ[1]. We had sent an initial
patch[2]
and we wanted access to jenkins jobs to test and continue further. Nigel
said
he will continue the work from there. May be he can update the thread now.
Here is the link for the public pad[3]. Not sure if this
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Raghavendra Talur
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Ilan Schwarts wrote:
> > Hi,
> > So this is a bit odd case.
> > I have created 2 servers nodes (running CentOS 7.3)
> > From Client machine (CentOS 7.2) I mount to
Some time back (2 yrs :) ) , we had discussion on automated bug work
flow enhancement [1] . Nandaja and Manikandan were working on this. I'm
not sure about the current status. If you have some time take a look at
the proposals [2] and how we can proceed.
[1] :
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Milind Changire wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Niels de Vos
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Ilan Schwarts wrote:
> Hi,
> So this is a bit odd case.
> I have created 2 servers nodes (running CentOS 7.3)
> From Client machine (CentOS 7.2) I mount to one of the nodes (nfs) using:
> [root@CentOS7286-64 mnt]# mount -t nfs
>
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 06:05:20PM +0530, Deepshikha Khandelwal wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > We have been testing static analysis for Gluster on the CI system for the
> > last few weeks.
> >
> > We have implemented
I've created an issue [1] to request the changes to the xlators.
I've also posted a patch for review [2] which adds the new fields to
the xlator options. The patch is on the experimental branch for now,
but I could just as well post it on master. It doesn't affect any
operations of GD1 or xlators
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Milind Changire wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
>> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 05:03:35PM +0530, Prashanth Pai
Hi Team,
I have an query regarding the usage of ACL on gluster volume. I have
noticed that when we use normal gluster volume (without ACL) CPU load is
low, but when we apply the ACL on gluster volume which internally uses Fuse
ACL, CPU load gets increase about 6x times.
Could you please let me
20 matches
Mail list logo