[Gluster-Maintainers] Update on 3.7.10 - on schedule to be tagged at 2200PDT 30th March.

Fri Apr 1 07:24:22 UTC 2016


On 04/01/2016 12:24 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
> In the time I was waiting for https://review.gluster.org/13861/ , a
> change was merged in (which I didn't know of) and has broken building
> RPMs.
>
> The offending change is 3d34c49  (cluster/ec: Rebalance hangs during
> rename) by Ashish.
> The same change had earlier also broken building RPMs on master.
>
> For now, to proceed with 3.7.10, I'm going to revert the offending
> change. Please make sure this change is merged in for the next
> release.

Sorry about this. I thought the commit which we are going to use for 
tagging is decided already so started merging as the build system gave 
+ve results for the patch I merged. After which Kotresh's patch is 
required for the release.
Will refrain from merging patches between tagging announcement till 
release in future.

Pranith
>
> ~kaushal
>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar
> <khiremat at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Point noted, will keep informed from next time!
>>
>> Thanks and Regards,
>> Kotresh H R
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Kaushal M" <kshlmster at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar" <khiremat at redhat.com>
>>> Cc: "Aravinda" <avishwan at redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel at gluster.org>, maintainers at gluster.org
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 7:32:58 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] Update on 3.7.10 - on schedule to be tagged at 2200PDT 30th March.
>>>
>>> This is a really hard to hit issue, that requires a lot of things to
>>> be in place for it to happen.
>>> But it is an unexpected data loss issue.
>>>
>>> I'll wait tonight for the change to be merged, though I really don't like it.
>>>
>>> You could have informed me on this thread earlier.
>>> Please, in the future, keep release-managers/maintainers updated about
>>> any critical changes.
>>>
>>> The only reason this is getting merged now, is because of the Jenkins
>>> migration which got completed surprisingly quickly.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar
>>> <khiremat at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> Kaushal,
>>>>
>>>> I just replied to Aravinda's mail. Anyway pasting the snippet if someone
>>>> misses that.
>>>>
>>>>      "In the scenario mentioned by aravinda below, when an unlink comes on a
>>>>      entry, in changelog xlator, it's 'loc->pargfid'
>>>>      was getting modified to "/". So consequence is that , when it hits
>>>>      posix, the 'loc->pargfid' would be pointing
>>>>      to "/" instead of actual parent. This is not so terrible yet, as we are
>>>>      saved by posix. Posix checks
>>>>      for "loc->path" first, only if it's not filled, it will use
>>>>      "pargfid/bname" combination. So only for
>>>>      clients like self-heal who does not populate 'loc->path' and the same
>>>>      basename exists on root, the
>>>>      unlink happens on root instead of actual path."
>>>>
>>>> Thanks and Regards,
>>>> Kotresh H R
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Kaushal M" <kshlmster at gmail.com>
>>>>> To: "Aravinda" <avishwan at redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel at gluster.org>, maintainers at gluster.org,
>>>>> "Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar"
>>>>> <khiremat at redhat.com>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 6:56:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] Update on 3.7.10 - on schedule to be
>>>>> tagged at 2200PDT 30th March.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kotresh, Could you please provide the details?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Aravinda <avishwan at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Kaushal,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have a Changelog bug which can lead to data loss if Glusterfind is
>>>>>> enabled(To be specific,  when changelog.capture-del-path and
>>>>>> changelog.changelog options enabled on a replica volume).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://review.gluster.org/#/c/13861/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is very corner case. but good to go with the release. We tried to
>>>>>> merge
>>>>>> this before the merge window for 3.7.10, but regressions not yet
>>>>>> complete
>>>>>> :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you think we should wait for this patch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Kotresh can provide more details about this issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> regards
>>>>>> Aravinda
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/31/2016 01:29 PM, Kaushal M wrote:
>>>>>>> The last change for 3.7.10 has been merged now. Commit 2cd5b75 will be
>>>>>>> used for the release. I'll be preparing release-notes, and tagging the
>>>>>>> release soon.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After running verification tests and checking for any perf
>>>>>>> improvements, I'll make be making the release tarball.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Kaushal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Kaushal M <kshlmster at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'll be taking over the release duties for 3.7.10. Vijay is busy and
>>>>>>>> could not get the time to do a scheduled release.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The .10 release has been scheduled for tagging on 30th (ie. today).
>>>>>>>> In the interests of providing some heads up to developers wishing to
>>>>>>>> get changes merged,
>>>>>>>> I'll be waiting till 10PM PDT, 30th March. (0500UTC/1030IST 31st
>>>>>>>> March), to tag the release.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So you have ~15 hours to get any changes required merged.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Kaushal
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> maintainers mailing list
>>>>>>> maintainers at gluster.org
>>>>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
>>>>>>