New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

jewel: rbd: Enabling mirroring for a pool with clones may fail #14663

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Aug 23, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants

@smithfarm smithfarm self-assigned this Apr 20, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm added this to the jewel milestone Apr 20, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm added bug fix core rbd and removed core labels Apr 20, 2017

@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm

smithfarm Apr 24, 2017

Contributor

@dillaman I ran this PR and a couple other RBD jewel PRs [1] through an RBD suite at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19538#note-47 and was suprised to see 8 failures, all of them appearing to be a failed TestLibRBD.Mirror test. Can you help debug?

[1] http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19538#note-38

Contributor

smithfarm commented Apr 24, 2017

@dillaman I ran this PR and a couple other RBD jewel PRs [1] through an RBD suite at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19538#note-47 and was suprised to see 8 failures, all of them appearing to be a failed TestLibRBD.Mirror test. Can you help debug?

[1] http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19538#note-38

@dillaman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dillaman

dillaman Apr 25, 2017

Contributor

@smithfarm Revert 83bae8b from wip-jewel-backports for now -- the TestLibRBD.Mirror test cases uses a hard-coded image name

Contributor

dillaman commented Apr 25, 2017

@smithfarm Revert 83bae8b from wip-jewel-backports for now -- the TestLibRBD.Mirror test cases uses a hard-coded image name

@smithfarm smithfarm changed the title from jewel: Enabling mirroring for a pool wiht clones may fail to [DNM] jewel: Enabling mirroring for a pool wiht clones may fail Apr 25, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm changed the title from [DNM] jewel: Enabling mirroring for a pool wiht clones may fail to jewel: rbd: Enabling mirroring for a pool with clones may fail Jun 4, 2017

@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm

smithfarm Jun 4, 2017

Contributor

Done

Contributor

smithfarm commented Jun 4, 2017

Done

@amitkumar50

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@amitkumar50

amitkumar50 Aug 17, 2017

Contributor

@smithfarm Nathan Sorry to say But if you can limit Title for future PRs to be inside 50 characters?
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/master/SubmittingPatches.rst#title-of-pull-requests-and-title-of-commits

Contributor

amitkumar50 commented Aug 17, 2017

@smithfarm Nathan Sorry to say But if you can limit Title for future PRs to be inside 50 characters?
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/master/SubmittingPatches.rst#title-of-pull-requests-and-title-of-commits

Mykola Golub and others added some commits Mar 2, 2017

librbd: relax "is parent mirrored" check when enabling mirroring for …
…pool

If the parent is in the same pool and has the journaling feature enabled
we can assume the mirroring will eventually be enabled for it.

Fixes: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19130
Signed-off-by: Mykola Golub <mgolub@mirantis.com>
(cherry picked from commit fe31bca)
test: remove hard-coded image name from RBD metadata test
Fixes: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19798
Signed-off-by: Jason Dillaman <dillaman@redhat.com>
(cherry picked from commit 8f72e74)
@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm

smithfarm Aug 22, 2017

Contributor

The following three rbd-related PRs were included in a recent jewel integration branch:

An rbd suite was run on said branch, and it failed rather spectacularly: http://pulpito.front.sepia.ceph.com/smithfarm-2017-08-21_20:07:45-rbd-wip-jewel-backports-distro-basic-smithi/

Pushed wip-19228-jewel to ceph-ci with intent to run an rbd suite on this single PR: https://shaman.ceph.com/builds/ceph/wip-19228-jewel/e6582c43bebac315ef2d76fded92373c7b1300be/

Contributor

smithfarm commented Aug 22, 2017

The following three rbd-related PRs were included in a recent jewel integration branch:

An rbd suite was run on said branch, and it failed rather spectacularly: http://pulpito.front.sepia.ceph.com/smithfarm-2017-08-21_20:07:45-rbd-wip-jewel-backports-distro-basic-smithi/

Pushed wip-19228-jewel to ceph-ci with intent to run an rbd suite on this single PR: https://shaman.ceph.com/builds/ceph/wip-19228-jewel/e6582c43bebac315ef2d76fded92373c7b1300be/

@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm
Contributor

smithfarm commented Aug 22, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm requested a review from dillaman Aug 22, 2017

@trociny

LGTM

@smithfarm smithfarm merged commit 3e75beb into ceph:jewel Aug 23, 2017

4 checks passed

Docs: build check OK - docs built
Details
Signed-off-by all commits in this PR are signed
Details
Unmodified Submodules submodules for project are unmodified
Details
make check make check succeeded
Details

@smithfarm smithfarm deleted the smithfarm:wip-19228-jewel branch Aug 23, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment