On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 09:38:19AM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:
> ./tests/bugs/changelog/bug-1208470.t seems to have failed a NetBSD run:
> https://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/17651/consoleFull
> Not sure if it is spurious as it passed in the subsequent run. Please
On 01/19/2016 02:00 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 01/19/2016 01:57 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 09:38:19AM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:
./tests/bugs/changelog/bug-1208470.t seems to have failed a NetBSD
run:
Saravanakumar Arumugam wrote:
Hi,
Yes, I can easily add additional 2 second sleep.
But, the problem here is: irrespective of anything(especially these
timing changes), it should not create any additional changelog.
It is a test volume created for test purpose where no I/O is carried out.
So,
Hi Saravna,
./tests/bugs/changelog/bug-1208470.t seems to have failed a NetBSD run:
https://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/17651/consoleFull
Not sure if it is spurious as it passed in the subsequent run. Please
have a look.
Thanks,
Ravi
Ravishankar N wrote:
Hi Saravna,
./tests/bugs/changelog/bug-1208470.t seems to have failed a NetBSD run:
https://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/17651/consoleFull
Not sure if it is spurious as it passed in the subsequent run. Please
have a look.
Might be too soon to
Hi Ravi,
I can run this locally, seems like spurious.
Let me know if you see again.
Please correct my email id, you are addressing another Saravana :)
Thanks,
Saravana
On 01/19/2016 09:42 AM, Venky Shankar wrote:
Ravishankar N wrote:
Hi Saravna,
./tests/bugs/changelog/bug-1208470.t seems
On 01/19/2016 12:01 PM, Venky Shankar wrote:
Saravanakumar Arumugam wrote:
Hi Ravi,
I can run this locally, seems like spurious.
Works fine on Linux for me too.Maybe its observed easily on BSD.
Let me know if you see again.
To be safe, it would benefit to have sleep(1) before the check.
Hi,
Yes, I can easily add additional 2 second sleep.
But, the problem here is: irrespective of anything(especially these
timing changes), it should not create any additional changelog.
It is a test volume created for test purpose where no I/O is carried out.
So, we may end up putting band-aid
Saravanakumar Arumugam wrote:
Hi Ravi,
I can run this locally, seems like spurious.
Let me know if you see again.
To be safe, it would benefit to have sleep(1) before the check.
Please correct my email id, you are addressing another Saravana :)
Thanks,
Saravana
On 01/19/2016 09:42 AM,
