Bug 1441035 - remove bug-1421590-brick-mux-reuse-ports.t
Summary: remove bug-1421590-brick-mux-reuse-ports.t
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: GlusterFS
Classification: Community
Component: tests
Version: mainline
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Atin Mukherjee
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1445407
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2017-04-11 03:54 UTC by Atin Mukherjee
Modified: 2017-05-30 18:49 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version: glusterfs-3.11.0
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1445407 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-05-30 18:49:52 UTC
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Atin Mukherjee 2017-04-11 03:54:40 UTC
Description of problem:

bug-1421590-brick-mux-reuse-ports.t seems to be a bad test to me and here is my reasoning:

This test tries to check if the ports are reused or not. When a volume is restarted, by the time glusterd tries to allocate a new port to the one of the brick processes of the volume there is no guarantee that the older port will be allocated given the kernel might take some extra time to free up the port between this time frame. From https://build.gluster.org/job/regression-test-burn-in/2932/console we can clearly see that post restart of the volume, glusterd allocated port 49153 & 49155 for brick1 & brick2 respectively but the test was expecting the ports to be matched with 49155 & 49156 which were allocated before the volume was restarted.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
mainline

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Worker Ant 2017-04-11 03:57:36 UTC
REVIEW: https://review.gluster.org/17033 (tests: remove tests/bugs/core/bug-1421590-brick-mux-reuse-ports.t) posted (#1) for review on master by Atin Mukherjee (amukherj)

Comment 2 Worker Ant 2017-04-12 07:09:13 UTC
COMMIT: https://review.gluster.org/17033 committed in master by Atin Mukherjee (amukherj) 
------
commit 1612355327fa5f86078b9dbcf7a38e4e0c63e205
Author: Atin Mukherjee <amukherj>
Date:   Tue Apr 11 09:25:48 2017 +0530

    tests: remove tests/bugs/core/bug-1421590-brick-mux-reuse-ports.t
    
    bug-1421590-brick-mux-reuse-ports.t seems to be a bad test to me and here is my
    reasoning:
    
    This test tries to check if the ports are reused or not. When a volume is
    restarted, by the time glusterd tries to allocate a new port to the one of the
    brick processes of the volume there is no guarantee that the older port will be
    allocated given the kernel might take some extra time to free up the port between
    this time frame. From
    https://build.gluster.org/job/regression-test-burn-in/2932/console we can
    clearly see that post restart of the volume, glusterd allocated port 49153 &
    49155 for brick1 & brick2 respectively but the test was expecting the ports to
    be matched with 49155 & 49156 which were allocated before the volume was
    restarted.
    
    Change-Id: Id887bf28445261d4de04fc7502e58057659c9512
    BUG: 1441035
    Signed-off-by: Atin Mukherjee <amukherj>
    Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/17033
    Smoke: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org>
    NetBSD-regression: NetBSD Build System <jenkins.org>
    CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org>
    Reviewed-by: Amar Tumballi <amarts>

Comment 3 Shyamsundar 2017-05-30 18:49:52 UTC
This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.11.0, please open a new bug report.

glusterfs-3.11.0 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution.

[1] http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/announce/2017-May/000073.html
[2] https://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.