On Thu, 4 Dec 2014, Ma, Jianpeng wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ceph-devel-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > [mailto:ceph-devel-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sage Weil > > Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 2:57 PM > > To: Ma, Jianpeng > > Cc: sjust@xxxxxxxxxx; ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: fadvise status > > > > Hey, > > > > I'm getting caught up after being out most of last week. I see: > > > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/2964 > > > > client side librados and librbd changes. ready to go > > > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/2988 > > > > osd changes. look good, but needs a rebase (merge conflict?) and a test. > > I think at this point you should rebase everything into a single branch so that > > you can use the client-side stuff to add some simple functional tests in > > ceph_test_rados_api_[a]io. > Yes, merge into a single branch(met one conflict) and WIP on test case. > > > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/2817 > > > > I think this is superceded by the above changes.. can we just close it? > > > In my two pull requests don't contain this. I think they are independent. > If you don't have disagreement on 2817. I think you can merge. Can you review https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/3080 ? I rebased this into a different patch and combined this with the old filestore_replica_fadvise. THis will need to go through the test suite (and possibly powercycle suite) to make sure it's safe; we original stopped doing this because the comobination of sync_file_range and fadvise was triggering a corruption in XFS on power loss, but we don't do sync_file_range anymore. Thanks! sage -- 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
