Open Stack

Excerpts from Ghanshyam Mann's message of 2017-06-16 23:05:08 +0900:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 10:57 PM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
> > On 06/16/2017 09:51 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It would be useful to provide detailed examples. Everything is trade
> >>> offs, and having the conversation in the abstract is very difficult to
> >>> understand those trade offs.
> >>>
> >>>      -Sean
> >>>
> >>
> >> We've had this issue in Cinder and os-brick. Usually around Ceph, but if
> >> you follow the user survey, that's the most popular backend.
> >>
> >> The problem we see is the tempest test that covers this is non-voting.
> >> And there have been several cases so far where this non-voting job does
> >> not pass, due to a legitimate failure, but the tempest patch merges anyway.
> >>
> >>
> >> To be fair, these failures usually do point out actual problems that need
> >> to be fixed. Not always, but at least in a few cases. But instead of it
> >> being addressed first to make sure there is no disruption, it's suddenly
> >> a blocking issue that holds up everything until it's either reverted, skipped,
> >> or the problem is resolved.
> >>
> >> Here's one recent instance: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471352/
> >
> > Sure, if ceph is the primary concern, that feels like it should be a
> > reasonable specific thing to fix. It's not a grand issue, it's a
> > specific mismatch on what configs should be common.
> 
> yea, we had such cases and decided to have blacklist of tests not
> suitable for ceph. ceph job will exclude the tests failing on ceph.
> Jon is working on this - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459774/
> 
> This approach solve the problem without limiting tests scope. [1]
> 
> ..1 http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-May/116172.html
> 
> -gmann

Is ceph behaving in an unexpected way or are the tests are making
implicit assumptions that might also cause trouble for other backends
if these tests ever make it into the suite used by the interop team?

Doug