I would agree with your assessment that http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10560#teuthology-runs-on-3944c77c404c4a05886fe8276d5d0dd7e4f20410-6-february sounds like a repeat of http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/4959. Josh, thoughts? -- Jason Dillaman Red Hat dillaman@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Loic Dachary" <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Jason Dillaman" <dillaman@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "Josh Durgin" <jdurgin@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Ceph Development" <ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, February 9, 2015 5:12:58 AM Subject: Re: RBD tests on the next dumpling release Hi Jason, Your backport of http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/9854 at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/3655 was added to the dumpling-backports branch and the RBD suite run came back with one error. http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10560#teuthology-runs-on-3944c77c404c4a05886fe8276d5d0dd7e4f20410-6-february I'm under the impression that this is unrelated. What do you think ? The error found in the previous run http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10560#teuthology-runs-on-fd37e5a9749c5579a592ebe926a3c576be0617cd-3-february could not be repeated by another run of the same test http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-02-05_21:41:04-rbd-dumpling-backports---basic-multi/ and I closed the ticket as "Can't reproduce" since you did not reproduce it locally either. Feel free to change the state of the ticket if, for instance, you would like it to remain open during a few weeks in case it shows up again. Cheers On 06/02/2015 15:42, Jason Dillaman wrote: > I would say #9854 is critical for this dumpling point release since it fixes a regression that would otherwise be introduced by this point release. > -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre -- 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
