On 05/28/2015 08:16 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/22/2015 11:45 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/21/2015 12:07 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:56 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/18/2015 08:03 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status u
On 05/22/2015 11:45 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/21/2015 12:07 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:56 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/18/2015 08:03 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so
that
sday, May 26, 2015 4:43:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Moratorium on new patch acceptance
>
> Here is the status on quota test-case spurious failure:
>
> There were 3 issues
> 1) Quota exceeding the limit because of parallel writes - Merged
> Upstream, patch submitted to releas
Here is the status on quota test-case spurious failure:
There were 3 issues
1) Quota exceeding the limit because of parallel writes - Merged
Upstream, patch submitted to release-3.7 #10910
./tests/bugs/quota/bug-1038598.t
./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1161156.t
2) Quoting accounti
On 05/21/2015 12:07 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:56 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/18/2015 08:03 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so that
we are clear about where we are and what nee
On 05/21/2015 09:33 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
On Thursday 21 May 2015 06:48 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/21/2015 04:04 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 09:50 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:23 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
Did that (in the attached script that I sent) and it still failed.
On Thursday 21 May 2015 06:48 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/21/2015 04:04 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 09:50 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:23 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
Did that (in the attached script that I sent) and it still failed.
Please note:
- This dd command passes (or f
On 05/21/2015 04:04 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 09:50 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:23 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
Did that (in the attached script that I sent) and it still failed.
Please note:
- This dd command passes (or fails with EDQUOT)
- dd if=/dev/zero of=$N0/$mydi
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 09:50 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:23 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 08:36 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 08:10 AM, Raghavendra G wrote:
After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
thread, we are proposing all quota tes
On 05/21/2015 12:07 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:56 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/18/2015 08:03 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so
that
we are clear about where we are and what
On 05/19/2015 11:56 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/18/2015 08:03 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so that
we are clear about where we are and what needs to be done to remove this
moratorium. Appr
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Shyam wrote:
> On 05/19/2015 08:10 AM, Raghavendra G wrote:
>
>> After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
>> thread, we are proposing all quota tests to comply to following criteria:
>>
>> * use dd always with oflag=append (to make su
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 09:50 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 11:23 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 08:36 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 08:10 AM, Raghavendra G wrote:
After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
thread, we are proposing all quota tes
On 05/18/2015 08:03 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so that
we are clear about where we are and what needs to be done to remove this
moratorium. Appreciate your help in having a clean set of reg
On 05/19/2015 11:23 AM, Vijaikumar M wrote:
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 08:36 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 08:10 AM, Raghavendra G wrote:
After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
thread, we are proposing all quota tests to comply to following
criteria:
* use dd alw
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 08:36 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/19/2015 08:10 AM, Raghavendra G wrote:
After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
thread, we are proposing all quota tests to comply to following
criteria:
* use dd always with oflag=append (to make sure there a
On 05/19/2015 08:10 AM, Raghavendra G wrote:
After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
thread, we are proposing all quota tests to comply to following criteria:
* use dd always with oflag=append (to make sure there are no parallel
writes) and conv=fdatasync (to make
> * fdatasync is issued only once at the end of all writes when conv=fdatasync
> * for some strange reason no fsync or fdatasync is issued at all when
> conv=sync
That's because of my typo. I meant oflag=sync, not conv=sync. Sorry.
> So, using conv=fdatasync in the test cannot prevent write-par
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Raghavendra G
wrote:
> After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
> thread, we are proposing all quota tests to comply to following criteria:
>
> * use dd always with oflag=append (to make sure there are no parallel
> writes) and conv=f
After discussion with Vijaykumar mallikarjuna and other inputs in this
thread, we are proposing all quota tests to comply to following criteria:
* use dd always with oflag=append (to make sure there are no parallel
writes) and conv=fdatasync (to make sure errors, if any are delivered to
applicatio
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Jeff Darcy wrote:
> > No, my suggestion was aimed at not having parallel writes. In this case
> quota
> > won't even fail the writes with EDQUOT because of reasons explained
> above.
> > Yes, we need to disable flush-behind along with this so that errors are
> > d
> No, my suggestion was aimed at not having parallel writes. In this case quota
> won't even fail the writes with EDQUOT because of reasons explained above.
> Yes, we need to disable flush-behind along with this so that errors are
> delivered to application.
Would conv=sync help here? That should
- Original Message -
> From: "Vijay Bellur"
> To: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" , "Shyam"
>
> Cc: gluster-devel@gluster.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 1:29:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Moratorium on new patch acceptance
>
&
On 05/19/2015 12:21 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
Yes, this is a possible scenario. There is a finite time window between,
1. Querying the size of a directory. In other words checking whether
current
write can be allowed
2. The "effect" of this write getting reflected in size of all the p
On 05/19/2015 11:46 AM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Shyam"
To: gluster-devel@gluster.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 6:13:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Moratorium on new patch acceptance
On 05/18/2015 07:05 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/18/201
- Original Message -
> From: "Raghavendra Gowdappa"
> To: "Shyam"
> Cc: gluster-devel@gluster.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 11:49:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Moratorium on new patch acceptance
>
>
>
> - Original Message
- Original Message -
> From: "Raghavendra Gowdappa"
> To: "Shyam"
> Cc: gluster-devel@gluster.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 11:46:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Moratorium on new patch acceptance
>
>
>
> - Original Message
- Original Message -
> From: "Shyam"
> To: gluster-devel@gluster.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 6:13:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Moratorium on new patch acceptance
>
> On 05/18/2015 07:05 PM, Shyam wrote:
> > On 05/18/2015 03:49 PM, Shyam
On Tuesday 19 May 2015 06:13 AM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/18/2015 07:05 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/18/2015 03:49 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/18/2015 10:33 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
The etherpad did not call out, ./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1161156.t
which did not have an owner, and so I took a stab at it and
On 05/18/2015 07:05 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/18/2015 03:49 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/18/2015 10:33 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
The etherpad did not call out, ./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1161156.t
which did not have an owner, and so I took a stab at it and below are
the results.
I also think failure in
On 05/18/2015 03:49 PM, Shyam wrote:
On 05/18/2015 10:33 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
The etherpad did not call out, ./tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1161156.t
which did not have an owner, and so I took a stab at it and below are
the results.
I also think failure in ./tests/bugs/quota/bug-1038598.t is th
On 05/18/2015 10:33 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so that
we are clear about where we are and what needs to be done to remove this
moratorium. Appreciate your help in having a clean set of reg
> > ./tests/bugs/glusterd/bug-974007.t
> I looked at the core generated by this test and it turned to be a mem pool
> corruption. I will continue to investigate on this and keep you posted.
Thank you. It looks like we have another generic memory-management problem
that has surfaced more than once
On 18 May 2015 20:03, "Vijay Bellur" wrote:
>
> On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
>
>>
>> I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so that
>> we are clear about where we are and what needs to be done to remove this
>> moratorium. Appreciate your help in having a cl
On 05/16/2015 03:34 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
I will send daily status updates from Monday (05/18) about this so that
we are clear about where we are and what needs to be done to remove this
moratorium. Appreciate your help in having a clean set of regression
tests going forward!
We have made
On 05/17/2015 02:17 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
Vijay Bellur wrote:
We made a commitment to fix all regression tests before doing anything
else for 3.7.1 and beyond.
What about adding a fix Jenkins requirement? It keeps trashing NetBSD VM
randomly, which makes regression tests hard to obtain
Vijay Bellur wrote:
> We made a commitment to fix all regression tests before doing anything
> else for 3.7.1 and beyond.
What about adding a fix Jenkins requirement? It keeps trashing NetBSD VM
randomly, which makes regression tests hard to obtain.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pu
Hey All,
We made a commitment to fix all regression tests before doing anything
else for 3.7.1 and beyond. Now is the time to honor the commitment. I
request all maintainers to stop merging patches till the following tests
are fixed and removed from is_bad_test() in run-tests.sh:
./tests/bas
38 matches
Mail list logo
