Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Release notes (please read and contribute)

On 02/02/2018 10:26 AM, Ravishankar N wrote: >>> 2) "Replace MD5 usage to enable FIPS support" - Ravi, Amar > > + Kotresh who has done most (all to be precise) of the patches listed in > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/230  in case he would like > to add anything. > > There is a

Re: [Gluster-devel] IMP: upgrade issue

On 02/13/2018 12:35 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Jiffin Tony Thottan > > wrote: > > Since the change was there from 3.10 onwards, only upgrade from > eoled version to stable will break right? > >

[Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: RC0 packages

Hi, We have tagged and created RC0 packages for the 4.0 release of Gluster. Details of the packages are given below. We request community feedback from the RC stages, so that the end release can be better, towards this please test and direct any feedback to the lists for us to take a look at.

Re: [Gluster-devel] Inputs for 4.0 Release notes on Performance

On 02/19/2018 09:29 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote: > I am trying to come up with content for release notes for 4.0 > summarizing performance impact. Can you point me to > patches/documentation/issues/bugs that could impact performance in 4.0? > Better still, if you can give me a summary of

Re: [Gluster-devel] GlusterFS project contribution.

On 02/22/2018 07:21 AM, Javier Romero wrote: > Ok, thanks for your answer. Javier, further this [1] thread gives more details around where the wireshark code lives as of now, and the wireshark roadmap etc. It would be awesome to catch up wireshark dissector upto the 4.0 RPC version. [1]

Re: [Gluster-devel] GlusterFS project contribution.

On 02/17/2018 06:48 PM, Javier Romero wrote: > I've been contributing through the CentOS Storage SIG with the > GlusterFS Github containers repository. > Have created a new Dockerfile for image creation to run containers on > CentOS 7 with GlusterFS 3.13 already installed. Also sent a pull >

[Gluster-devel] Release 3.13.2: Planned for 19th of Jan, 2018

Hi, As release 3.13.1 is announced, here is are the needed details for 3.13.2 Release date: 19th Jan, 2018 (20th is a Saturday) Tracker bug for blockers: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=glusterfs-3.13.2 Shyam ___ Gluster-devel mailing list

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 3.10.9: Planned for 03rd of Jan, 2018

Reminder: tagging for 3.10.9 is tomorrow (3rd Jan, 2018) On 12/08/2017 01:00 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Hi, > > As release 3.10.8 is announced, here is are the needed details for 3.10.9 > > Release date: 03rd Jan, 2018 > Tracker bug for blockers: > https://bugzilla.re

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] 2018 - Plans and Expectations on Gluster Community

On 01/03/2018 08:05 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: > On 01/02/2018 11:03 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote: >> ...     The people who were writing storhaug never finished it. Keep >> using >>     3.10 until storhaug gets finished. >> >> >> >> Since 3.10 will be EOL in approximately 2 months from now, what

[Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: RC1 tagged

Hi, RC1 is tagged in the code, and the request for packaging the same is on its way. We should have packages as early as today, and request the community to test the same and return some feedback. We have about 3-4 days (till Thursday) for any pending fixes and the final release to happen, so

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 3.10.11: Planned for the 28th of Feb, 2018

On 02/19/2018 09:16 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> As release 3.10.10 is tagged and off to packaging, here are the needed >> details for 3.10.11 >> >> Release date: 28th Feb, 2018 > Checking the 3.10 review backlog, here are a couple of concerns, > > 1) Reviews,

Re: [Gluster-devel] bug-1432542-mpx-restart-crash.t failures

On 08/01/2018 11:10 PM, Nigel Babu wrote: > Hi Shyam, > > Amar and I sat down to debug this failure[1] this morning. There was a > bit of fun looking at the logs. It looked like the test restarted > itself. The first log entry is at 16:20:03. This test has a timeout of > 400 seconds which is

Re: [Gluster-devel] FreeBSD smoke test may fail for older changes, rebase needed

On 07/31/2018 02:12 AM, Niels de Vos wrote: > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 02:44:57PM -0400, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> On 07/28/2018 12:45 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: >>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 03:37:46PM +0200, Niels de Vos wrote: >>>> This Friday argp-standalone got in

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 30th July)

On 08/01/2018 12:13 AM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: >> Thinking aloud, we may have to stop merges to master to get these test >> failures addressed at the earliest and to continue maintaining them >> GREEN for the health of the branch. >> >> I would give the above a week, before we lockdown the

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Nightly test failures tracking

On 07/24/2018 03:12 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > 1) master branch health checks (weekly, till branching) > - Expect every Monday a status update on various tests runs As we have quite a few jobs failing and quite a few tests failing, to enable tracking this better I have created the

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 30th July)

On 07/24/2018 03:12 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > 1) master branch health checks (weekly, till branching) > - Expect every Monday a status update on various tests runs See https://build.gluster.org/job/nightly-master/ for a report on various nightly and periodic jobs on master.

Re: [Gluster-devel] FreeBSD smoke test may fail for older changes, rebase needed

On 07/28/2018 12:45 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: > On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 03:37:46PM +0200, Niels de Vos wrote: >> This Friday argp-standalone got installed on the FreeBSD Jenkins >> slave(s). With the library available, we can now drop the bundled and >> unmaintained contrib/argp-standlone/ from our

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 23rd July)

On 07/26/2018 12:53 AM, Nigel Babu wrote: > 3) bug-1432542-mpx-restart-crash.t times out consistently: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1608568 > > @nigel is there a way to on-demand request lcov tests through gerrit? I > am thinking of pushing a patch that increases

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 30th July)

On 07/30/2018 03:21 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 07/24/2018 03:12 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> 1) master branch health checks (weekly, till branching) >> - Expect every Monday a status update on various tests runs > > See https://build.gluster.org/job/nightly

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 30th July)

On 07/31/2018 07:16 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 07/30/2018 03:21 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> On 07/24/2018 03:12 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >>> 1) master branch health checks (weekly, till branching) >>> - Expect every Monday a status update on vari

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 30th July)

On 07/31/2018 12:41 PM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > tests/bugs/core/bug-1432542-mpx-restart-crash.t - Times out even after > 400 secs. Refer > https://fstat.gluster.org/failure/209?state=2_date=2018-06-30_date=2018-07-31=all, > specifically the latest report >

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 30th July)

-EMLINK-handling.t, 405 tests/bugs/replicate/bug-1386188-sbrain-fav-child.t, 4048 tests/bugs/replicate/bug-1433571-undo-pending-only-on-up-bricks.t, 813 Thanks, Shyam On 07/30/2018 03:21 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 07/24/2018 03:12 PM, Sh

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Master branch lock down status

On 08/08/2018 04:56 AM, Nigel Babu wrote: > Also, Shyam was saying that in case of retries, the old (failure) logs > get overwritten by the retries which are successful. Can we disable > re-trying the .ts when they fail just for this lock down period > alone so > that we do

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Wed, August 08th)

07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Deserves a new beginning, threads on the other mail have gone deep enough. > > NOTE: (5) below needs your attention, rest is just process and data on > how to find failures. > > 1) We are running the tests using the patch [2]. > > 2) R

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Master branch lock down status

On 08/08/2018 09:43 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 08/08/2018 09:41 AM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar wrote: >> For geo-rep test retrials. Could you take this instrumentation patch [1] >> and give a run? >> I am have tried thrice on the patch with brick mux enabled and wi

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Fri, August 9th)

recording runs till now: https://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/20637#message-07f3886dda133ed642438eb9e82b82d957668e86 On 08/07/2018 07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Deserves a new beginning, threads on the other mail have gone deep enough. > > NOTE: (5) below needs your attention, res

Re: [Gluster-devel] Test: ./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1042725.t

On 08/07/2018 07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > 6) Tests that are addressed or are not occurring anymore are, > > ./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1042725.t The above test fails, I think due to cleanup not completing in the previous test failure. The failed runs are: https://build.gluste

[Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status

tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1122443.t ./tests/bugs/core/bug-1432542-mpx-restart-crash.t Shyam (and Atin) On 08/05/2018 06:24 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Health on master as of the last nightly run [4] is still the same. > > Potential patches that rectify the situation (as in [1]) are bunc

Re: [Gluster-devel] Test: ./tests/bugs/ec/bug-1236065.t

On 08/07/2018 07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > 5) Current test failures > We still have the following tests failing and some without any RCA or > attention, (If something is incorrect, write back). > > ./tests/bugs/ec/bug-1236065.t (Ashish) Ashish/Atin, the above test faile

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 30th July)

On 08/07/2018 02:58 PM, Yaniv Kaul wrote: > The intention is to stabilize master and not add more patches that my > destabilize it. > > > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/20603/ has been merged. > As far as I can see, it has nothing to do with stabilization and should > be reverted.

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down: RCA for tests (UNSOLVED bug-1110262.t)

On 08/12/2018 08:42 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > As a means of keeping the focus going and squashing the remaining tests > that were failing sporadically, request each test/component owner to, > > - respond to this mail changing the subject (testname.t) to the

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down: RCA for tests (UNSOLVED ./tests/basic/stats-dump.t)

On 08/13/2018 02:32 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > I will be adding a bug and a fix that tries this in a loop to avoid the > potential race that I see above as the cause. Bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615582 Potential fix: https://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/20726

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down: RCA for tests (./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1042725.t)

On 08/12/2018 08:42 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > As a means of keeping the focus going and squashing the remaining tests > that were failing sporadically, request each test/component owner to, > > - respond to this mail changing the subject (testname.t) to the

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down: RCA for tests (./tests/bugs/core/bug-1432542-mpx-restart-crash.t)

On 08/12/2018 08:42 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > As a means of keeping the focus going and squashing the remaining tests > that were failing sporadically, request each test/component owner to, > > - respond to this mail changing the subject (testname.t) to the

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Master branch lock down for stabilization (unlocking the same)

On 08/13/2018 02:20 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > - At the end of 2 weeks, reassess master and nightly test status, and > see if we need another drive towards stabilizing master by locking down > the same and focusing only on test and code stability around the same. > > > When

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down: RCA for tests (./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1117851.t)

On 08/12/2018 08:42 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > As a means of keeping the focus going and squashing the remaining tests > that were failing sporadically, request each test/component owner to, > > - respond to this mail changing the subject (testname.t) to the

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down: RCA for tests (UNSOLVED ./tests/basic/stats-dump.t)

On 08/12/2018 08:42 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > As a means of keeping the focus going and squashing the remaining tests > that were failing sporadically, request each test/component owner to, > > - respond to this mail changing the subject (testname.t) to the

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Patch set 11, Aug 12, 2018)

://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/20637/12#message-1f8f94aaa88be276229f20eb25a650381bc37543 On 08/07/2018 07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Deserves a new beginning, threads on the other mail have gone deep enough. > > NOTE: (5) below needs your attention, rest is just process and data on >

[Gluster-devel] Release 5: Release calendar and status updates

This mail is to solicit the following, Features/enhancements planned for Gluster 5 needs the following from contributors: - Open/Use relevant issue - Mark issue with the "Release 5" milestone [1] - Post to the devel lists issue details, requesting addition to track the same for the release

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down: RCA for tests (testname.t)

As a means of keeping the focus going and squashing the remaining tests that were failing sporadically, request each test/component owner to, - respond to this mail changing the subject (testname.t) to the test name that they are responding to (adding more than one in case they have the same RCA)

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Aug 12th, 2018) (patchset 12)

here: https://review.gluster.org/c/glusterfs/+/20637/12#message-186adbee76d6999385022239cb2daba589f0a81f Shyam On 08/07/2018 07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Deserves a new beginning, threads on the other mail have gone deep enough. > > NOTE: (5) below needs your attention, rest is jus

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Master branch lock down status (Fri, August 9th)

d from run-tests.sh (when there are retries) then the logs will be archived. We do not call out a run as a failure in case there were retries, hence no logs. I will add this today to the WIP testing patchset. > > > On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 9:40 AM Ravishankar N <mailto:ravishan...@redhat

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Wed, August 08th)

On 08/09/2018 10:58 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 1:38 AM, Shyam Ranganathan <mailto:srang...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > On 08/08/2018 09:04 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > > Today's patch set 7 [1], included fixes

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Fri, August 9th)

On 08/10/2018 09:59 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Today's patch set is 9 [1]. > > Total of 7 runs for line-coverage, mux regressions, centos7 regressions > are running (some are yet to complete). > > Test failure summary is as follows, Updating this section 1. ./tests/bugs/g

Re: [Gluster-devel] tests/bugs/core/multiplex-limit-issue-151.t timed out

On 08/11/2018 12:43 AM, Mohit Agrawal wrote: > File a bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615003, I am not > able to extract logs > specific to this test case from the log dump. This is because the test is calling cleanup twice in its exit bash traps. - First, the test itself sets a

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Thu, August 09th)

/8#message-54de30fa384fd02b0426d9db6d07fad4eeefcf08 On 08/07/2018 07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Deserves a new beginning, threads on the other mail have gone deep enough. > > NOTE: (5) below needs your attention, rest is just process and data on > how to find failures. > > 1) We

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Master branch lock down for stabilization (unlocking the same)

On 08/14/2018 12:51 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 10:55 PM Shyam Ranganathan <mailto:srang...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > On 08/13/2018 02:20 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > >     - At the end of 2 weeks, reassess master

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Sat. Aug 10th)

#message-2030bb77ed8d98618caded7b823bc4d65238e911 On 08/07/2018 07:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Deserves a new beginning, threads on the other mail have gone deep enough. > > NOTE: (5) below needs your attention, rest is just process and data on > how to find failures. > >

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Master branch lock down status

On 08/08/2018 09:41 AM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar wrote: > For geo-rep test retrials. Could you take this instrumentation patch [1] > and give a run? > I am have tried thrice on the patch with brick mux enabled and without > but couldn't hit > geo-rep failure. May be some race and it's not

Re: [Gluster-devel] Master branch lock down status (Wed, August 08th)

On 08/08/2018 09:04 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Today's patch set 7 [1], included fixes provided till last evening IST, > and its runs can be seen here [2] (yay! we can link to comments in > gerrit now). > > New failures: (added to the spreadsheet) > ./tests/bugs/quick

[Gluster-devel] Test health report (week ending 19th Aug. 2018)

Although tests have stabilized quite a bit, and from the maintainers meeting we know that some tests have patches coming in, here is a readout of other tests that needed a retry. We need to reduce failures on retries as well, to be able to not have spurious or other failures in test runs. Tests

[Gluster-devel] Test health report (week ending 26th Aug, 2018)

Need more focus on the retry cases, so that we have fewer failures overall due to the same. 2 useful changes are in, fstat now has the ability to filter by job, and tests that timeout will save older logs for analysis (assuming of course the run failed, if on retry the run passes then the job is

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Release calendar and status updates

On 08/14/2018 02:28 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > 2) Branching date: (Monday) Aug-20-2018 (~40 days before GA tagging) We are postponing branching to 2nd week of September (10th), as the entire effort in this release has been around stability and fixing issues across the board. Thus,

[Gluster-devel] Release 5: Release targeted for first week of October-2018

Hi, Post release 4.1 we have announced a release version and cadence change to the lists [1]. Based on this the next release of Gluster would be "5" and is slated during the first week of October, 2018 [2]. With this release of Gluster (i.e 5), 3.12 will be EOLd and that is the last release in

Re: [Gluster-devel] Tests failing for distributed regression framework

On 07/18/2018 05:42 AM, Deepshikha Khandelwal wrote: > Hi all, > > There are tests which have been constantly failing for distributed > regression framework[1]. I would like to draw the maintainer's > attention to look at these two bugs[2]&[3] and help us to attain the > RCA for such failures. >

Re: [Gluster-devel] Tests failing for distributed regression framework

On 07/18/2018 10:51 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 07/18/2018 05:42 AM, Deepshikha Khandelwal wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> There are tests which have been constantly failing for distributed >> regression framework[1]. I would like to draw the maintainer's >> attentio

Re: [Gluster-devel] Tests failing for distributed regression framework

t 8:40 PM Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> >> On 07/18/2018 10:51 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >>> On 07/18/2018 05:42 AM, Deepshikha Khandelwal wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> There are tests which have been constantly failing for distributed >>&g

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Release targeted for first week of October-2018

On 07/17/2018 11:31 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Hi, > > Post release 4.1 we have announced a release version and cadence change > to the lists [1]. Based on this the next release of Gluster would be "5" > and is slated during the first week of October, 2018 [2

[Gluster-devel] Failing multiplex regressions!

Hi, Multiplex regression jobs are failing everyday, see [1]. May I know is anyone is looking into this? It was Mohit the last time around, are you still working on this Mohit? What patches are in progress to address this, if you are on it? Thanks, Shyam [1] regression-test-with-multiplex -

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 23rd July)

On 07/24/2018 03:12 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > 1) master branch health checks (weekly, till branching) > - Expect every Monday a status update on various tests runs See https://build.gluster.org/job/nightly-master/ for a report on various nightly and periodic jobs on master.

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 23rd July)

On 07/24/2018 03:28 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 07/24/2018 03:12 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> 1) master branch health checks (weekly, till branching) >> - Expect every Monday a status update on various tests runs > > See https://build.gluster.org/job/nightly

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Master branch health report (Week of 23rd July)

On 07/25/2018 04:18 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > 2) glusterd crash in test sdfs-sanity.t: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1608566 > > glusterd folks, request you to take a look to correct this. Persisted with this a little longer and the fix is pos

Re: [Gluster-devel] Proposal to change Gerrit -> Bugzilla updates

On 09/10/2018 08:37 AM, Nigel Babu wrote: > Hello folks, > > We now have review.gluster.org as an > external tracker on Bugzilla. Our current automation when there is a > bugzilla attached to a patch is as follows: > > 1. When a new patchset has "Fixes: bz#1234" or

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 5: Release calendar and status updates

On 08/22/2018 02:03 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 08/14/2018 02:28 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> 2) Branching date: (Monday) Aug-20-2018 (~40 days before GA tagging) > > We are postponing branching to 2nd week of September (10th), as the > entire effort in this relea

[Gluster-devel] Gluster Release cadence and version changes

This announcement is to publish changes to the upstream release cadence from quarterly (every 3 months), to every 4 months and to have all releases maintained (no more LTM/STM releases), based on the maintenance and EOL schedules for the same. Further, it is to start numbering releases with just

Re: [Gluster-devel] [gluster-packaging] Release 4.0: Making it happen! (GlusterD2)

On 01/12/2018 06:31 AM, Niels de Vos wrote: > I think it will be really painful to maintain a .spec that has the > current (already very complex) glusterfs bits, and the new GD2 > components. Packaging Golang is quite different from anything written in > C, and will make the mixed language .spec

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 3.13.2: Planned for 19th of Jan, 2018

On 01/18/2018 07:34 PM, Ravishankar N wrote: > > > On 01/18/2018 11:53 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> On 01/02/2018 11:08 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> As release 3.13.1 is announced, here is are the needed details for >>>

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched

4.0 release has been branched! I will follow this up with a more detailed schedule for the release, and also the granted feature backport exceptions that we are waiting. Feature backports would need to make it in by this weekend, so that we can tag RC0 by the end of the month. Only exception

Re: [Gluster-devel] a link issue maybe introduced in a bug fix " Don't let NFS cache stat after writes"

On 01/10/2018 07:07 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > When stat is "zero filled", understanding is that the higher layer > protocol doesn't send stat value to the kernel and a separate lookup is > sent by the kernel to get the latest stat value. In which protocol are > you seeing this issue?

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Proposal to change the version numbers of Gluster project

On 03/12/2018 10:34 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > * > > After 4.1, we want to move to either continuous numbering (like > Fedora), or time based (like ubuntu etc) release numbers. Which > is the model we pick is not yet finalized. Happy to hear opinions. > > > Not

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/13/2018 03:53 AM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri > <pkara...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:07 AM, Shyam Ranganathan <srang...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >>>

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/14/2018 02:40 AM, Aravinda wrote: > I have following suggestion for managing release notes. Let me know > if this can be included in automation document. Aravinda, I assume this is an additional suggestion, orthogonal to the current discussion around spec and docs, right? > > > If a

Re: [Gluster-devel] Fwd: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-4.0.0 released

On 03/08/2018 06:17 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Forwarding to the devel and users groups as well. > > We have tagged 4.0.0 branch as GA, and are in the process of building > packages. > > It would a good time to run final install/upgrade tests if you get a > chance on

[Gluster-devel] Release 3.10.12: Planned for the 30th of Mar, 2018

Hi, As release 3.10.11 is announced [1], here are the needed details for 3.10.12, Release date: Mar, 30th 2018 Tracker bug for blockers: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=glusterfs-3.10.12 Shyam [1] http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/announce/2018-March/91.html

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Proposal to change the version numbers of Gluster project

On 03/15/2018 12:48 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Vijay Bellur <vbel...@redhat.com > <mailto:vbel...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Shyam Ranganathan > <srang...@redh

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Proposal to change the version numbers of Gluster project

On 03/14/2018 07:04 PM, Joe Julian wrote: > > > On 03/14/2018 02:25 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY >> <kkeit...@redhat.com <mailto:kkeit...@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> On 03/12/2018

[Gluster-devel] Fwd: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [gluster-packaging] glusterfs-4.0.0 released

Forwarding to the devel and users groups as well. We have tagged 4.0.0 branch as GA, and are in the process of building packages. It would a good time to run final install/upgrade tests if you get a chance on these packages (I am running off to do the same now). Thanks, Shyam

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.0: RC1 tagged

On 03/05/2018 09:05 AM, Javier Romero wrote: >> I am about halfway through my own upgrade testing (using centOS7 >> containers), and it is patterned around this [1], in case that helps. > Taking a look at this. > > Thanks for confirming the install of the bits. On the upgrade front, I did

[Gluster-devel] Announcing Gluster release 4.0.0 (Short Term Maintenance)

The Gluster community celebrates 13 years of development with this latest release, Gluster 4.0. This release enables improved integration with containers, an enhanced user experience, and a next-generation management framework. The 4.0 release helps cloud-native app developers choose Gluster as

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 4.1: Schedule, scope and review focus

On 03/27/2018 02:59 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Hi, > > As we have completed potential scope for 4.1 release (reflected here [1] > and also here [2]), it's time to talk about the schedule. > > - Branching date (and hence feature exception date): Apr 16th We are abou

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 4.1: Schedule, scope and review focus

On 04/11/2018 09:07 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 03/27/2018 02:59 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> Hi, >> >> As we have completed potential scope for 4.1 release (reflected here [1] >> and also here [2]), it's time to talk about the schedule. >> >> - Bran

[Gluster-devel] Release 3.10, 3.12, 4.0: Tagged for release

Hi, The next set of minor updates for 3.10/12 and 4.0 are tagged and under packaging. These releases were made together to address a security vulnerability in Gluster [1]. Going forward, due to the 4.1 release there is a good chance that we will not do any more releases of 3.10 and 4.0, as both

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 3.10, 3.12, 4.0: Tagged for release

On 04/24/2018 04:14 PM, Niels de Vos wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:43:29AM -0400, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The next set of minor updates for 3.10/12 and 4.0 are tagged and under >> packaging. > > Please see the announcements of the tagging for

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/26/2018 12:33 AM, Aravinda wrote: >>> Also want to propose that,  we include a release >>> of http://github.com/gluster/gluster-health-report with 4.1, and make >>> the project more usable. >> In the theme of including sub-projects that we want to highlight, what >> else should we tag a

[Gluster-devel] Release 4.1: Schedule, scope and review focus

Hi, As we have completed potential scope for 4.1 release (reflected here [1] and also here [2]), it's time to talk about the schedule. - Branching date (and hence feature exception date): Apr 16th - Week of Apr 16th release notes updated for all features in the release - RC0 tagging: Apr 23rd -

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/23/2018 09:18 AM, Niels de Vos wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:17:28AM +0530, Amar Tumballi wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Shyam Ranganathan <srang...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 03/21/2018 04:12 AM, Amar Tumballi wrote: >>>&g

[Gluster-devel] Announcing Gluster release 4.0.1 (Short Term Maintenance)

The Gluster community is pleased to announce the release of Gluster 4.0.1 (packages available at [1]). Release notes for the release can be found at [2]. Thanks, Gluster community [1] Packages: https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/4.0/4.0.1/ [2] Release notes:

[Gluster-devel] Release 4.0.1: Slated for tomorrow

Hi, The first minor update for 4.0 is here (already!). 20th of each month was the day of release, I am postponing this by a day, as we did not announce this clearly to the lists, and hence want to give this 24 hours post announcement for any stragglers to make it. One patch that is still under

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/12/2018 09:37 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Hi, > > As we wind down on 4.0 activities (waiting on docs to hit the site, and > packages to be available in CentOS repositories before announcing the > release), it is time to start preparing for the 4.1 release. > > 4.1

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/14/2018 12:05 PM, Aravinda wrote: > On 03/14/2018 05:38 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> On 03/14/2018 02:40 AM, Aravinda wrote: >>> I have following suggestion for managing release notes. Let me know >>> if this can be included in automation docu

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/21/2018 04:12 AM, Amar Tumballi wrote: > Current 4.1 project release lane is empty! I cleaned it up, because I > want to hear from all as to what content to add, than add things marked > with the 4.1 milestone by default. > > > I would like to see we have sane default values

[Gluster-devel] Release 4.0.2: Planned for the 20th of Apr, 2018

Hi, As release 4.0.1 is (to be) announced, here is are the needed details for 4.0.2 Release date: 20th Apr, 2018 Tracker bug for blockers: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=glusterfs-4.0.2 Shyam ___ Gluster-devel mailing list

Re: [Gluster-devel] Removal of use-compound-fops option in afr

On 03/04/2018 10:15 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > Shyam, >     Do let me know if there is anything that needs to be done on the > process front. I see that use-compound-fops is now deprecated, which is something that users need to be aware of. So when preparing release-notes, for when

[Gluster-devel] Smoke failing consistently on devrpm-fedora?

While going though patches, I see that from around Feb 28th, smoke is failing always, see [1]. The failure seems to have started as mock.py moved from 1.4.8 to 1.4.9. @Nigel/Kaleb, is this something that the changed in the infra, that has caused this, or just that with the latest mock we have

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.0: RC1 tagged

On 02/28/2018 07:25 AM, Javier Romero wrote: > This one fails > http://cbs.centos.org/kojifiles/work/tasks/1548/311548/centos-release-gluster40-0.9-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm > > # yum install -y >

[Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Unable to complete rolling upgrade tests

Hi Pranith/Ravi, So, to keep a long story short, post upgrading 1 node in a 3 node 3.13 cluster, self-heal is not able to catch the heal backlog and this is a very simple synthetic test anyway, but the end result is that upgrade testing is failing. Here are the details, - Using

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Unable to complete rolling upgrade tests

On 03/02/2018 02:41 AM, Ravishankar N wrote: > I still got the mkdir error on a plain distribute volume that I referred > to in the other email in this thread. Anyone who is interested in trying > it out, the steps are: > - Create a 2 node 2x1 plain distribute vol on 3.13 and fuse mount on node-1

Re: [Gluster-devel] GlusterD2 - 4.0.0rc1 (warning: we have a blocker for GD2)

On 03/02/2018 04:24 AM, Kaushal M wrote: > I was able to create libglusterfsd, with just the pmap_signout nad > autoscale functions. > Turned out to be easy enough to do in the end. > I've pushed a patch for review [1] on master. Thanks! > > I've also opened new bugs to track the fixes for

Re: [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Unable to complete rolling upgrade tests

On 03/02/2018 12:34 AM, Anoop C S wrote: > On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 10:11 +0530, Ravishankar N wrote: >> + Anoop. >> >> It looks like clients on the old (3.12) nodes are not able to talk to >> the upgraded (4.0) node. I see messages like these on the old clients: >> >> [2018-03-02 03:49:13.483458]

[Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: GA tagging status and blockers

Hi, Here are the list of patches that we are waiting on before tagging GA for Gluster 4.0. (packages and release announcement comes in about 2-5 days post this). We hope to be ready to tag the release on Monday 5th March, and will keep the list posted on a daily basis on any slips. 1) Patches

<    1   2   3   >