[OpenAFS] buildbot and packages
Sun, 16 Sep 2012 00:34:30 -0500
I'll buy that for a few emails.
Let's start by having you take a look at:
There are tabs for issues & wikis, so sign up for a bitbucket account and
ask some questions there, so we don't spam the -devel list with lots of
'how do I xyz' questions
For the openafs-devel list, please let the list know what resources/
platforms you have for testing, and I'd like to hear from the list what
could I write some tests for that could utilize those resources.
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 09:44:07PM -0700, Doug Hirsch wrote:
> If you set this up, I'm willing to be your guinea pig. It'll cost you
> enough support and/or documentation to get me over initial learning
> On 9/15/12, Troy Benjegerdes <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Sometimes I think we get hung up on 'good testing' vs having *something*.
> > The last time I worked for someone else, it was writing test code for
> > Cray's
> > supercomputer systems. You don't get much more complex than a machine
> > with 30,000 cores in which 'acceptable' performance is defined as 'pushing
> > the system to the point right before it collapses into an unusable heap',
> > and it's got to run a workload of hundreds of thousands of the world's most
> > complex and numerically sensitive computational codes.
> > And I'd hazard a guess that 3/4 of the system problems were with the
> > filesystem
> > (Lustre most often). I've also heard a pretty good argument that the reason
> > Cray went bankrupt a couple of times is they over-tested. If you did get a
> > machine back in the YMP days, it was very well tested, but the price showed
> > it, and clusters ate their market.
> > Maybe we don't have money.. But how many users of AFS are there. I'm not
> > talking
> > companies, I'm talking people.. specifically, bored college students. How
> > many
> > people have used AFS at a major university, and might help us out doing
> > manual
> > testing if we give them a framework?
> > To paraphrase the .. well.. chief cat herder .. of the most widely deployed
> > operating system ever (Linux),
> > "With enough QA testers, all bugs are shallow"
> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 04:42:37PM -0500, David Boyes wrote:
> >> > In this case I think you are low-balling the estimate. To do it right
> >> > it isn't
> >> > sufficient to test one build against itself. You need to test new
> >> > clients
> >> > against a range of old servers and vice versa in a constrained
> >> > environment.
> >> > It is necessary to be able to identify when a change has an adverse
> >> > performance impact as well as accuracy. There is a need to be able to
> >> > introduce intentional errors at various points in the protocol. Just
> >> > the
> >> > hardware costs are mid 5 digits and the software development is
> >> > significantly more than that.
> >> I agree -- if you were starting from scratch, you're probably right.
> >> But, a) I wasn't starting from scratch, so the additional equipment for
> >> adding the AFS framework stuff was about what I quoted, and b) I was
> >> discussing our tooling and test setup, not the general case.
> >> We reused existing tooling in a number of places, and layered the AFS
> >> component onto that. We do this kind of thing for other software, so we
> >> had a decent baseline to start from.
> >> Solid QA infrastructure -- especially for complex systems -- isn't simple
> >> or cheap; there we agree wholeheartedly.
> >> :??
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenAFS-info mailing list
> > OpenAFSfirstname.lastname@example.org
> > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info