http://wiki.opensfs.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=LWG_Minutes_2017-06-15LWG Minutes 2017-06-15 - Revision history2026-07-22T02:17:05ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.43.3http://wiki.opensfs.org/index.php?title=LWG_Minutes_2017-06-15&diff=2206&oldid=prevJgmitter at 15:18, 1 February 20182018-02-01T15:18:34Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 08:18, 1 February 2018</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l60">Line 60:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 60:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><br /></div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><br /></div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>'''Next meeting will be on 2017-06-29 at 11:00am Pacific'''</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>'''Next meeting will be on 2017-06-29 at 11:00am Pacific'''</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[[Category:LWG]]</ins></div></td></tr>
<!-- diff cache key wiki_opensfs_org-wiki_:diff:1.41:old-2135:rev-2206:php=table -->
</table>Jgmitterhttp://wiki.opensfs.org/index.php?title=LWG_Minutes_2017-06-15&diff=2135&oldid=prevJgmitter: Created page with "== Attendance == Cray: Cory Spitz, Ben Evans, Patrick Farrell <br /> ORNL: James Simmons, Dustin Leverman <br /> IU: Ken Rawlings <br /> SuperMicro: Abe Asraoui <br /> HPE..."2017-06-27T13:08:09Z<p>Created page with "== Attendance == Cray: Cory Spitz, Ben Evans, Patrick Farrell <br /> ORNL: James Simmons, Dustin Leverman <br /> IU: Ken Rawlings <br /> SuperMicro: Abe Asraoui <br /> HPE..."</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>== Attendance ==<br />
Cray: Cory Spitz, Ben Evans, Patrick Farrell <br /><br />
ORNL: James Simmons, Dustin Leverman <br /><br />
IU: Ken Rawlings <br /><br />
SuperMicro: Abe Asraoui <br /><br />
HPE: Olaf Weber, Robert Clark <br /><br />
Intel: Andreas Dilger, Joe Gmitter, Peter Jones <br /><br />
<br />
== Actions ==<br />
'''New Actions Captured:''' <br /><br />
*None<br />
<br />
'''Existing Open Actions:''' <br /><br />
*None<br />
<br />
'''Actions Recently Closed:''' <br /><br />
*Cory to speak with Chris regarding the open questions on the NRS delay policy docs (LUDOC-366).<br />
*Cory to get Ben engaged with Henri for review of LU-9021 patches.<br />
<br />
== Minutes ==<br />
<br />
'''2.10 Release Update''' <br /><br />
Peter <br /><br />
*We are down to 9 issues tracking with FixVersion 2.10, 5 of which have a fix in the ready state and is in gatekeeper testing.<br />
*One outstanding issue is LU-9073 that James has been working on and Sebastian Buisson providing feedback.<br />
**The good news is that John fixed the workaround and it is ready. Sebastian has been testing due to having a kerberos setup to use.<br />
*LU-9049 we have a fix that we believe works and is undergoing further testing.<br />
*Two issues which are the long poles at the moment are LU-9405 and LU-9485. We are still isolating what the problem is there. These may be become blockers once we understand the issue.<br />
*On the documentation front, NRS delay policy, Project Quota, and multi-rail have patches in flight that are undergoing refinement.<br />
*James: We are getting an ARM machine soon and likely will need the last 2 patches from LU-8703. There are two patches left and trying to get reviewers to look at them before code freeze.<br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Upstream Lustre Client''' <br /><br />
James <br /><br />
*Submitted a bunch of cleanups. James reports that they are thinking of phasing out the 80 character issue.<br />
**Andreas: The logic for it is really is that it effects the number of terminals you can have open on one screen without line wrapping.<br />
**James: Linus is thinking about going to 100.<br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''lustre.org''' <br /><br />
Ken <br /><br />
*We decided to delay server upgrades until after LUG and will look do it before the next LWG call.<br />
*There is interest in putting together a Lustre tutorial. The thinking on this is to submit it as a BOF session at SC this year. Will start engaging people interested in collaborating on it. Any thoughts?<br />
**Peter: Is the thinking to have the BOF for new Lustre developers?<br />
***Ken:Yes<br />
**Peter: Is anyone on the call attending SC that could participate?<br />
***Dustin: May be going and might be able to participate.<br />
**Peter: What do you envision us needing for content? For a BOF it would have to be 60-90 min in length. Is this reasonable?<br />
***Discussion ensued around thoughts of what is best addressed in getting started. General consensus was it would be difficult to accomplish this in that sort of time frame.<br />
***If engineers were able to download items ahead of time and prepare, then it comes down to probably about 60 min of actual training time.<br />
***To be successful at this based on hackathon, a good idea of number of participants is needed and at least enough helpers to have 1 engineer available for every 3 engineers in training.<br />
<br /><br />
<br />
'''Other Business''' <br /><br />
*Peter: Any thoughts on Developer Day or the hackathon from those that attended?<br />
**Ben: Developer Day went really well. Hackathon would have been better with a bit more structure to it with having working groups set up in advance.<br />
**Peter: I agree and we thought we had this set up in advance, but we didn’t execute well on it at the event.<br />
**Cory: I thought hackathon was pretty cool and maybe we should have devoted my time to it. Once we started people wanted to go off and join the social event.<br />
**Ken: The time pressure issue could be fixed, maybe post-LUG event with RSVP and topics set up in advance would be better.<br />
<br /><br />
'''Next meeting will be on 2017-06-29 at 11:00am Pacific'''</div>Jgmitter