Re: should we prepare to release firefly v0.80.10 ?

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

 




On 15/05/2015 21:05, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2015, Loic Dachary wrote:
>> Hi Sage,
>>
>> On 21/04/2015 17:52, Sage Weil wrote:
>>> The bulk of it is ceph-objectstore-tool, which is important to get into a 
>>> release, IMO.  David, are these being tested in the firefly thrashing 
>>> tests yet?
>>>
>>> The only other one I'm worried about is
>>>
>>> 6fd3dfa osd: do not ignore deleted pgs on startup
>>>
>>> Sam, I assume the recent hammer upgrade issue is would bite firefly folks 
>>> who upgrade too?
>>
>> A backport of "OSD::load_pgs: we need to handle the case where an upgrade from earlier versions which ignored non-existent pgs resurrects a pg with a prehistoric osdmap" http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11429 found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/4556 has been successfully tested on firefly at http://pulpito.ceph.com/loic-2015-05-13_00:01:26-rados-firefly-backports---basic-multi/ and in a rados suite run that completed today http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11090#rados.
>>
>> Provided https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/4556 is merged, do you think we should prepare to release firefly v0.80.10 ?
> 
> As Yehuda mentioned the other open issue is the rgw multipart corruption.  
> I'm guessing we want to include that?

Yes, we will include and test the http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11622 and http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11604 backports.

Cheers

> 
> sage
> 
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>>
>>> sage
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Loic Dachary wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Sage,
>>>>
>>>> The firefly branch has a number of fixes ( http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11090#Release-information ) and has been used for upgrade tests in the past few weeks. A few other issues have been backported since and are being tested in the integration branch ( http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11090#teuthology-run-commitb91bbb434e6363a99a632cf3841f70f1f2549f79-integration-branch-april-2015 ). 
>>>>
>>>> Do you think these changes deserve a firefly v0.80.10 release ? Should we ask each lead for their approval ? Or is it better to keep backporting what needs to be and wait a few weeks ?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
>>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
>>

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[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