[Gluster-devel] Re-thinking gluster regression logging

Vijay Bellur vbellur at redhat.com
Tue Jul 3 22:11:51 UTC 2018

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 4:59 AM Nigel Babu <nigelb at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hello folks,
> Deepshikha is working on getting the distributed-regression testing into
> production. This is a good time to discuss how we log our regression. We
> tend to go with the approach of "get as many logs as possible" and then we
> try to make sense of it when it something fails.
> In a setup where we distribute the tests to 10 machines, that means
> fetching runs from 10 machines and trying to make sense of it. Granted, the
> number of files will most likely remain the same since a successful test is
> only run once, but a failed test is re-attempted two more times on
> different machines. So we will now have duplicates.
> I have a couple of suggestions and I'd like to see what people think.
> 1. We stop doing tar of tars to do the logs and just tar the
> /var/log/glusterfs folder at the end of the run. That will probably achieve
> better compression.
> 2. We could stream the logs to a service like ELK that we host. This means
> that no more tarballs. It also lets us test any logging improvements we
> plan to make for Gluster in one place.
> 2. I've been looking at Citellus[1] to write parsers that help us identify
> critical problems. This could be a way for us to build a repo of parsers
> that can identify common gluster issues.
> Perhaps our solution would be a mix of all 2 and 3. Ideally, I'd like us
> to avoid archiving tarballs to debug regression issues in the future.
A combination of 2 and 3 sounds good to me.

If we could dogfood gluster somewhere in this setup (storage backend for
Elastic?), it would be even more awesome! :)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20180703/e86bc3a7/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-devel mailing list