[Gluster-devel] Extra overnight regression test run results

[Vijay Bellur]

On 03/31/2015 06:48 PM, Shyam wrote:
> On 03/31/2015 08:33 AM, Justin Clift wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Ran 20 x regression test jobs on (severely resource
>> constrained) 1GB Rackspace VM's last night (in addition to the
>> 20x normal VM's ones also run).
>>
>> The 1GB VM's have much much slower disk, only one virtual CPU,
>> and 1/2 the RAM of our "standard" 2GB testing VMs.
>>
>> These are the failure results:
>>
>>    * 20 x tests/basic/mount-nfs-auth.t
>>          Failed test:  40
>>
>>      100% fail rate. ;)
>>
>>    * 20 x tests/basic/uss.t
>>          Failed tests:  149, 151-153, 157-159
>>
>>      100% fail rate
>>
>>    * 11 x tests/bugs/distribute/bug-1117851.t
>>          Failed test:  15
>>
>>      55% fail rate
>>
>>    * 2 x tests/performance/open-behind.t
>>          Failed test:  17
>>
>>      10% fail rate
>>
>>    * 1 x tests/basic/afr/self-heald.t
>>          Failed tests:  13-14, 16, 19-29, 32-50, 52-65,
>>                         67-75, 77, 79-81
>>
>>      5% fail rate
>>
>>    * 1 x tests/basic/afr/entry-self-heal.t
>>          Failed tests:  127-128
>>
>>      5% fail rate
>>
>>    * 1 x tests/features/trash.t
>>          Failed test:  57
>>
>>      5% fail rate
>>
>> Wouldn't surprise me if some/many of the failures are due to
>> time out of various sorts in tests.  Very slow VMs. ;)
>>
>> Also, most of the regression runs produced cores.  Here are
>> the first two:
>>
>>    http://ded.ninja/gluster/blk0/
>
> There are 4 cores here, 3 pointing to the (by now hopefully) famous bug
> #1195415. One of the cores exhibit a different stack etc. Need more
> analysis to see what the issue could be here, core file: core.16937
>

Adding Pranith as he mentioned a possible root cause for this now famous 
bug :).

-Vijay