Re: Throttle::wait use case clarification

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Loic,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you about these patches. :( I
finally got some time to look over them, and in general it's all good!
I do have some comments, though.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Looking through the history of that test (in _reset_max), I think it's an accident and we actually want to be waking up the front if the maximum increases (or possibly in all cases, in case the front is a very large request we're going to let through anyway). Want to submit a patch? :)
> :-) Here it is. "make check" does not complain. I've not run teuthology + qa-suite though. I figured out how to run teuthology but did not yet try qa-suite.
>
> http://marc.info/?l=ceph-devel&m=135877502606311&w=4

This patch to reverse the conditional is obviously fine.

>> The other possibility I was trying to investigate is that it had something to do with handling get() requests larger than the max correctly, but I can't find any evidence of that one...
> I've run the Throttle unit tests after uncommenting
> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/34/files#L3R269
> and commenting out
> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/34/files#L3R266
> and it passes.

Regarding these unit tests, I have a few questions which I left on
Github. Can you address them and then give a single pull request which
includes both the Throttle fix and the tests? :)
Thanks!
-Greg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux