On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:14:08PM +0530, Vijay Bellur wrote: > On 07/08/2014 01:54 PM, Avra Sengupta wrote: > >In the test case, we are checking gluster snap status to see if all the > >bricks are alive. One of the snap bricks fail to start up, and hence we > >see the failure. The brick fails to bind with "Address already in use" > >error. But if we see clearly that same log also says "binding to > >failed", where the address is missing. So it might be trying to bind to > >the wrong(or empty) address. > > > >Following are the brick logs for the same: > > > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662573] I > >[rpcsvc.c:2142:rpcsvc_set_outstanding_rpc_limit] 0-rpc-service: > >Configured rpc.outstanding-rpc-limit with value 64 > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662634] W [options.c:898:xl_opt_validate] > >0-ad94478591fc41648c9674b10143e3d2-server: option 'listen-port' is > >deprecated, preferred is 'transport.socket.listen-port', continuing with > >correction > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662758] E [socket.c:710:__socket_server_bind] > >0-tcp.ad94478591fc41648c9674b10143e3d2-server: binding to failed: > >Address already in use > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662776] E [socket.c:713:__socket_server_bind] > >0-tcp.ad94478591fc41648c9674b10143e3d2-server: Port is already in use > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662795] W [rpcsvc.c:1531:rpcsvc_transport_create] > >0-rpc-service: listening on transport failed > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662810] W [server.c:920:init] > >0-ad94478591fc41648c9674b10143e3d2-server: creation of listener failed > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662821] E [xlator.c:425:xlator_init] > >0-ad94478591fc41648c9674b10143e3d2-server: Initialization of volume > >'ad94478591fc41648c9674b10143e3d2-server' failed, review your volfile again > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662836] E [graph.c:322:glusterfs_graph_init] > >0-ad94478591fc41648c9674b10143e3d2-server: initializing translator failed > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.662847] E [graph.c:525:glusterfs_graph_activate] > >0-graph: init failed > >[2014-07-07 11:20:15.664283] W [glusterfsd.c:1182:cleanup_and_exit] (--> > >0-: received signum (0), shutting down > > > >Regards, > >Avra > > > >On 07/08/2014 11:28 AM, Joseph Fernandes wrote: > >>Hi Pranith, > >> > >>I am looking into this issue. Will keep you posted on the process by EOD > >> > >>Regards, > >>~Joe > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkarampu@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>To: josferna@xxxxxxxxxx > >>Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Rajesh Joseph" > >><rjoseph@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Sachin Pandit" <spandit@xxxxxxxxxx>, > >>asengupt@xxxxxxxxxx > >>Sent: Monday, July 7, 2014 8:42:24 PM > >>Subject: Re: regarding spurious failure > >>tests/bugs/bug-1112559.t > >> > >> > >>On 07/07/2014 06:18 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > >>>Joseph, > >>> Any updates on this? It failed 5 regressions today. > >>>http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB/541/consoleFull > >>>http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/175/consoleFull > >>> > >>> > >>>http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/173/consoleFull > >>> > >>> > >>>http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/166/consoleFull > >>> > >>> > >>>http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB-triggered/172/consoleFull > >>> > >>> > >>One more : > >>http://build.gluster.org/job/rackspace-regression-2GB/543/console > >> > >>Pranith > >> > >>>CC some more folks who work on snapshot. > >>> > > A lot of regression runs are failing because of this test unit. > Given feature freeze is around the corner, shall we provide a +1 > verified manually for those patchsets that fail this test? I don't think that is easily possible. We also need to remove the -1 verified that the "Gluster Build System" sets. I'm not sure how we should be doing that. Maybe its better to disable (parts of) the test-case? Niels _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
