Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-994

1.8<->2.1.54 Test failure on test suite replay-single 62

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Blocker
    • None
    • Lustre 2.2.0
    • None
    • 3
    • 6488

    Description

      This issue was created by maloo for sarah <sarah@whamcloud.com>

      This issue relates to the following test suite run: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/c460154a-3e73-11e1-b417-5254004bbbd3.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          duplicates

          Bug - A problem which impairs or prevents the functions of the product. LU-1036 1.8.7<->2.1.54 Test failure on test suite replay-single (52)

          • Major - Major loss of function.
          • Resolved

          Activity

            [LU-994] 1.8<->2.1.54 Test failure on test suite replay-single 62
            pjones Peter Jones made changes -
            Resolution New: Fixed [ 1 ]
            Status Original: Reopened [ 4 ] New: Resolved [ 5 ]
            pjones Peter Jones added a comment -

            As per Oleg ok to close - this appears because the version of 1.8.x being tested with does not contain this fix

            pjones Peter Jones added a comment - As per Oleg ok to close - this appears because the version of 1.8.x being tested with does not contain this fix
            pjones Peter Jones added a comment -

            Yes.http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=commit;h=8d4b77e5961c06847f9603ebc607118742ea1a51

            pjones Peter Jones added a comment - Yes. http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=commit;h=8d4b77e5961c06847f9603ebc607118742ea1a51
            bobijam Zhenyu Xu added a comment -

            it looks like a recovery timeout extension issue, and LU-1036 also involve the same issue. LU-889 reworks the recovery timeout extension logic.

            Does the rehit in RC1 contains patch of LU-889?

            bobijam Zhenyu Xu added a comment - it looks like a recovery timeout extension issue, and LU-1036 also involve the same issue. LU-889 reworks the recovery timeout extension logic. Does the rehit in RC1 contains patch of LU-889 ?
            pjones Peter Jones made changes -
            Resolution Original: Duplicate [ 3 ]
            Status Original: Resolved [ 5 ] New: Reopened [ 4 ]
            pjones Peter Jones added a comment -

            Are you sure that this is a duplicate of LU1036? It seems to relate to a different test # (62 rather than 52) and seems to still be occurring in RC1...

            pjones Peter Jones added a comment - Are you sure that this is a duplicate of LU1036? It seems to relate to a different test # (62 rather than 52) and seems to still be occurring in RC1...
            bobijam Zhenyu Xu made changes -
            Resolution New: Duplicate [ 3 ]
            Status Original: Open [ 1 ] New: Resolved [ 5 ]
            bobijam Zhenyu Xu added a comment -

            dup of LU-1036

            bobijam Zhenyu Xu added a comment - dup of LU-1036
            sarah Sarah Liu added a comment - - edited

            I use default value for both obd_timeout and ldlm_timeout. So I guess they accord? Yes, AT is enabled on client side. TIMEOUT in my config file is also set to 20.

            sarah Sarah Liu added a comment - - edited I use default value for both obd_timeout and ldlm_timeout. So I guess they accord? Yes, AT is enabled on client side. TIMEOUT in my config file is also set to 20.
            bobijam Zhenyu Xu made changes -
            Link New: This issue duplicates LU-1036 [ LU-1036 ]

            People

              bobijam Zhenyu Xu
              maloo Maloo
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: