Hey Dwight,
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
>> Hmm, you are testing through the go binding correct? I ran these two
>> without error:
>>
>> ./src/tests/lxc-test-concurrent -i 200 -j 8 create,destroy
>> ./src/tests/lxc-test-concurrent -i 100 -j 8
>>
>> I wonder if lxc-test-co
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> We were calling save_config() twice within the create() flow, each
> from a different process. Depending on order of scheduling, sometimes
> the data from the first save_config() (which was just the stuff from
> LXC_DEFAULT_CONFIG) would overwrite t
Hi Dwight,
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Dwight Engen wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:35:58 -0500
> S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Dwight Engen
>> wrote:
>> > We were calling save_config() twice within the create() flow, each
>> > from a different process. Dependi
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:35:58 -0500
S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Dwight Engen
> wrote:
> > We were calling save_config() twice within the create() flow, each
> > from a different process. Depending on order of scheduling,
> > sometimes the data from the first save_confi
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Dwight Engen wrote:
> We were calling save_config() twice within the create() flow, each
> from a different process. Depending on order of scheduling, sometimes
> the data from the first save_config() (which was just the stuff from
> LXC_DEFAULT_CONFIG) would overw
We were calling save_config() twice within the create() flow, each
from a different process. Depending on order of scheduling, sometimes
the data from the first save_config() (which was just the stuff from
LXC_DEFAULT_CONFIG) would overwrite the config we wanted (the full
config), causing a truncat
