hi Neha and Josh, thank you for your valuable inputs and help to drop bionic distro facets from master. just created https://github.com/ceph/ceph-build/pull/1830 to stop the builds on bionic. On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 5:02 AM Josh Durgin <jdurgin@redhat.com> wrote:
On 5/21/21 1:35 PM, Neha Ojha wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 8:49 PM Kefu Chai <kchai@redhat.com> wrote:
hi folks,
tl;dr: can we stop building/testing master on bionic for a better GCC?
long story: two months ago, we migrated[0] our CI jobs running "make check" from ubuntu/bionic to ubuntu/focal so we have access to more packages offered by focal for testing.
but we are still suffering[1] from the ancient packages offered by bionic:
- buggy tcmalloc. see https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/41340 - GCC 7.5.0 shipped along with ubuntu/bionic. i think the support of std::filesystem is just the tip of the iceberg, as we've migrated to C++17, there will be more and more demand for a compiler and a standard library with better C++17 (and C++20 in future) support. GCC-7 has good support[2] of C++17, but that does not imply that libstdc++ shipped along with GCC-7 has.
but we have to build and test on bionic[3], for couple reasons:
- some upgrade tests from octopus are performed on bionic. for instance, see https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/master/qa/suites/upgrade/pacific-x/paralle... - cosbench used by perf tests needs bionic: see https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/49139 - // please note rados/thrash-old-clients/distro$/ubuntu_18.04.yaml is safe even after we stop building master on bionic, as we've switched[4] to cephadm for thrash-old-clients
and because of https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/50218, we cannot use ubuntu-toolchain-r PPA repo for newer GCC.
so, i propose we
- drop building/testing master on bionic. - drop the upgrade test from pacific on bionic
I think we need to tread carefully here. Losing upgrade test coverage is not ideal.
We've still got focal for ubuntu coverage. If we're dropping it for quincy, a user would need to upgrade past bionic to run the next version anyway.
- drop the cosbench workload from rados/perf test suites
I have confirmed again that https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/49139 continues to be a problem with focal so I've proposed https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/41486.
I'd be curious to know what's the most commonly used rgw workload people use for benchmarking purposes. Perhaps, we should think about integrating it with the perf suite.
Agreed, maybe it's time to focus on other tools.
Josh