From 74da154a2116d2386258399641a39f6d830d3650 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sage Weil Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:40:49 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] osd/PG: make non-empty PastIntervals non-fatal Yes, we should not have past intervals in this case. However, we don't need to crash the OSD; the ERR in clog is sufficient to fail the teuthology run, and users in production don't actually care. See: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/20167 Signed-off-by: Sage Weil --- src/osd/PG.cc | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/osd/PG.cc b/src/osd/PG.cc index c186548a6c69..cea01f320028 100644 --- a/src/osd/PG.cc +++ b/src/osd/PG.cc @@ -799,7 +799,6 @@ void PG::check_past_interval_bounds() const derr << info.pgid << " required past_interval bounds are" << " empty [" << rpib << ") but past_intervals is not: " << past_intervals << dendl; - assert(past_intervals.empty()); } } else { if (past_intervals.empty()) { -- 2.47.3