osd/OSDMap: do not create erasure rule by default #1132
Conversation
|
Is there some reason we want to leave the command in a comment, instead of just removing it? |
|
i suppose not :) On Thu, 23 Jan 2014, Gregory Farnum wrote:
|
If we do, we will require the v2 feature bit from clients. We could only include feature bits for rules that are actually referenced by pools, but for now making the user create the rule is simpler. There is no need to create this rule ahead of time. Signed-off-by: Sage Weil <sage@inktank.com>
|
rebased because make check fails on bufferlist ( the branch is ~190 commits behind ) : running make check again |
|
LGTM but master is broken and I'm not able to compile & check 👍 |
|
make check running against new master rebase ;-) |
osd/OSDMap: do not create erasure rule by default Reviewed-by: Greg Farnum <greg@inktank.com> Reviewed-by: Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org>
ghost
merged commit
|
Realized I merged against next (and not master) after the fact :-( Running make check again after a rebase on next ( 12 commits behind only ). |
|
make check says all is well on next :-) |
rgw: we don't support btrfs any more
If we do, we will require the v2 feature bit from clients.
We could only include feature bits for rules that are actually referenced by
pools, but for now making the user create the rule is simpler. There is no
need to create this rule ahead of time.
Signed-off-by: Sage Weil sage@inktank.com