The heroes of Fedora updates testing in Q1 2013

1360095720_PrizeRecently I’ve published a list of contributors who helped to test Fedora 19 Alpha. But Quality Assurance doesn’t involve just in-development releases. We need to ensure that stable releases also work well. One of the major ways to achieve that is to make sure that broken package updates don’t enter stable updates repository. We use Bodhi system for that. I have gathered the data about Bodhi feedback contributors regardless of Fedora release involved and present it here.

Who are the heroes who watch the Fedora borders and guard us against broken software updates?

Test period: Q1 2013 (2013-01-01 – 2013-03-31)
Testers: 657
Comments1: 2203

Name Updates commented
hreindl 278
patches 94
kparal 92
mrunge 53
adamwill 48
akshayvyas29 41
mooninite 33
kevin 32
ankursinha 26
rdieter 25
keramidas 25
bojan 23
nucleo 23
boblfoot 20
pwalter 18
cfeller 18
quickbooks 17
bradw 15
amessina 15
sdodson 14
kwizart 14
wolnei 14
bitlord 14
freddyw 14
remi 13
pbrobinson 13
mstevens 13
lkocman 13
misc 13
orion 12
nb 12
artkun 11
nonamedotc 10
ktdreyer 10
ajax 10
jerboaa 10
vicodan 9
po80x-nontoxic at yahoo.co.uk 9
jvanalte 9
erinn 9
cairo 8
stransky 8
greenfeld 8
sysengbd 7
petersen 7
asrob 7
akurtakov 7
ejs1920 7
jmoskovc 7
jpopelka 7
ondrejj 6
mmilata 6
mtoman 6
robatino 6
tsmetana 6
jvcelak 6
wutao85 5
nkinder 5
gtwilliams 5
till 5
kkofler 5
rcritten 5
adomurad 5
ralph 5
bruno 5
ptisnovs 5
tjikkun 5
fabiand 5
rtcm 5
rlandy 5
balay 5
brallan 5
ppisar 5
…and also 584 other reporters who created less than 5 reports each, but 867 reports combined!

1 If a person provides multiple comments to a single update, it is considered as a single comment. Karma value is unimportant.

As you can see, Harald Reindl (hreindl) is completely leading this effort, and no one else is even close. Thank you, Harald!

There are lots of further names from the community. T.C. Hollingsworth (patches) provided an outstanding number of comments, followed by Akshay Vyas (akshayvyas29), mooninite, Ankur Sinha (ankursinha), Rex Dieter (rdieter), Vasileios Keramidas (keramidas), bojan, nucleo, Robert C. Lightfoot (boblfoot) and many more! Thank you, and everyone else who helped with testing Fedora updates, no matter your score.

If you are interested in helping Fedora, this is a very easy way and you can start today! Just read QA:Updates_Testing and ask any questions in #fedora-qa on IRC or test list. It would be great to see more faces around.

Thanks and enjoy the day.


When reading the statistics, please take it with a grain of salt. Not all numbers are directly comparable. This is not meant to be a comparison chart, but a well-meant “thank you” letter.
The statistics were generated by these scripts.

Impact of “discard” mount option on Intel 525 SSD

1368191239_DriveI have replaced my traditional HDD with an Intel 525 SSD (120 GB, mSATA) recently. To keep the write performance high a TRIM option should be enabled. You can either mount the drive with ‘discard’ option, or you can run fstrim command periodically. (This can be a bit trickier if you have LUKS encrypted partitions).

The discard option performs TRIM immediately when a file is deleted, and there is some performance hit involved. You can work around that by having fstrim in a cron job and trimming the disk just once a day or so. It takes longer (about a minute in my case), but it is not a continuous performance hit.

Two years ago Patrick Nagel published a blog about discard performance on his OCZ Vertex LE (100 GB). I was curious whether the numbers would be the same for my SSD. Let’s have a look.

Test description:
With and without discard option let’s do:

  1. Extract linux sources (linux-3.9.1.tar.gz; 45168 files, 592 MB extracted) including sync operation.
    $ time (tar xzf linux-3.9.1.tar.gz ; sync)
  2. Remove the directory including sync operation.
    $ time (rm linux-3.9.1 -rf; sync)

Of course, a few warmup rounds are included. The numbers are averaged from three passes. I have an ext4 partition on LVM on LUKS.

Results:
Without discard
extract: 7,367666667s
delete: 0,709666667s

With discard
extract: 7,373333333s
delete: 2,697333333s

You can also view the raw data.

As you can see, there is a substantial hit on deletion. Removing 45k files was almost 4x slower. But, on the other hand, we’re talking about mere few seconds here, which is way better than in Patrick’s example. I guess the SSD controllers really improved in two years.

I also did a quick second test with deleting a large (3 GB) file. The results are similar – without discard it takes about 0.43s and with discard it takes about 1.65s. So there is no substantial difference between deleting a huge number of smaller files and deleting a single big file.

The output? If you are a general user with no specific needs and you don’t want to bother with cron scripts, you can simply enable the discard option and have your life easier. Of course, we’re talking about Intel 525 here. If you have some other SSD, especially an older one, it might be a good idea to measure the numbers yourself.

Flattr this

The heroes of Fedora 19 Alpha testing

1360095720_PrizeFedora 19 Alpha has been released. I would like to thank everyone who contributed to testing it. Here are some interesting numbers from different quality verification areas. No matter how small or large your contribution is (or whether it is listed at all), if you helped Fedora 19 Alpha quality to improve, you have our thanks.

Fedora 19 Alpha – wiki matrices

This is the list of people who filled in our release validation wiki matrices (Install, Desktop and Base), which are posted for every test compose (and release candidate) that we create. The purpose is to see which areas have been thoroughly tested and which were not.

Test period: Fedora 19 branch time – Fedora 19 Alpha release
Testers: 23
Reports: 1001
Unique referenced bugs: 69

Name Reports submitted Referenced bugs1
robatino 316 919374 924138 924244 924248 924251 924254 924255 924256 924258 924260 926913 926916 929050 929054 929177 946964 951801 (17)
boblfoot 187 922558 929373 929403 929421 946906 946951 947536 947538 948615 949906 951766 957486 957554 957783 (14)
satellit 95 923951 928287 929289 947538 948921 949761 949802 950510 951842 952250 (10)
Wutao85 91 926926 927178 947028 947031 952512 952950 (6)
nonamedotc 57 892178 (1)
adamwill 47 858270 863592 928982 947558 953329 (5)
lnie 45 951269 952950 (2)
spstarr 34 949831 951259 (2)
jskladan 27 928228 928279 948250 948719 949761 (5)
mkrizek 21 928296 948615 951039 (3)
kparal 20 928279 928287 928339 950504 950510 (5)
lkardos 17
lbrabec 10
pschindl 9 947142 950504 950510 (3)
cra 7 907058 949761 950504 (3)
tflink 5
patches 3
jsedlak 3 950641 951449 953337 (3)
mbriza 3
wolnei 1 947285 (1)
boblfoor 1
pwnall 1
jdulaney 1

1 This is a list of bug reports linked to the wiki results. They don’t have to be reported by that concrete person.

As usual, Andre Robatino (robatino) is the king of the hill 🙂 Bob Lightfoot (boblfoot) continues to be the second most active person, as in Fedora 18 Final cycle. Many thanks, guys.

I’m very glad that there are a number of community contributors at the top. Besides robatino and boblfoot, namely Thomas Gilliard (satellit), nonamedotc and Shawn Starr (spstarr) provided an amazing number of test results. The number one Red Hatter is Tao Wu (Wutao85). Great job! Of course, even the smaller numbers in the ladder are greatly appreciated and help Fedora a lot. Thank you.

Fedora 19 Alpha – Bugzilla

This is a trimmed list of people who reported bugs into Bugzilla against Fedora 19 in the specified time period. The numbers are pretty high as usual, Bugzilla is our most visible QA tool.

Test period: Fedora 19 branch time – Fedora 19 Alpha release (2013-03-12 – 2013-04-23)
Reporters: 323
New reports: 1234

Name Reports submitted1 Excess reports2 Accepted blockers3
Dhiru Kholia 103 0 (0%) 0
Adam Williamson 54 1 (1%) 7
Reartes Guillermo 29 2 (6%) 0
Andre Robatino 27 10 (37%) 12
Stef Walter 27 1 (3%) 0
Kamil Páral 25 0 (0%) 3
Jens Petersen 25 1 (4%) 0
Daniel Walsh 19 1 (5%) 0
Ľuboš Kardoš 19 1 (5%) 0
sangu 17 0 (0%) 0
John Reiser 15 0 (0%) 0
Jeff Bastian 13 1 (7%) 0
Mark Hamzy 13 1 (7%) 0
Tim Waugh 13 1 (7%) 0
Robert Lightfoot 12 4 (33%) 2
Mike FABIAN 12 1 (8%) 1
Ales Kozumplik 12 0 (0%) 0
Jan Stodola 12 0 (0%) 0
Branislav Náter 11 1 (9%) 0
Dawid Zamirski 10 0 (0%) 0
Flóki Pálsson 10 0 (0%) 0
Karsten Hopp 10 0 (0%) 0
Leslie Satenstein 10 1 (10%) 0
Vladimir Benes 10 1 (10%) 0
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 10 1 (10%) 0
A S Alam 9 0 (0%) 0
Jan Safranek 9 0 (0%) 0
Martin Banas 9 3 (33%) 0
Mikolaj Izdebski 9 0 (0%) 0
mussadek 9 0 (0%) 0
Tanner Doshier 9 0 (0%) 0
Alex Murray 8 0 (0%) 0
Matthew Miller 8 1 (12%) 0
Michael Schwendt 8 0 (0%) 0
Orion Poplawski 8 0 (0%) 0
Patrik Kis 8 0 (0%) 0
satellit at bendbroadband.com 8 2 (25%) 0
Petr Schindler 7 0 (0%) 2
Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 7 2 (28%) 0
Hans de Goede 7 1 (14%) 0
Jiří Martínek 7 0 (0%) 0
Joachim Backes 7 1 (14%) 0
Peter Robinson 7 0 (0%) 0
Peter Trenholme 7 0 (0%) 0
Brian C. Lane 6 1 (16%) 1
Alexei Panov 6 0 (0%) 0
Artem Artemov 6 0 (0%) 0
Dan Waleke 6 0 (0%) 0
Ed Greshko 6 1 (16%) 0
Elad Alfassa 6 1 (16%) 0
Harald Hoyer 6 0 (0%) 0
Jakub Dorňák 6 0 (0%) 0
Jakub Filak 6 0 (0%) 0
Jiri Popelka 6 0 (0%) 0
T.C. Hollingsworth 6 1 (16%) 0
Tao Wu 6 2 (33%) 0
Vadim Rutkovsky 6 0 (0%) 0
Shawn Starr 5 1 (20%) 1
Dan Horák 5 0 (0%) 0
Dan Mashal 5 1 (20%) 0
Dennis Gilmore 5 0 (0%) 0
Gustavo Luiz Duarte 5 0 (0%) 0
Miroslav Grepl 5 3 (60%) 0
Mr-4 5 1 (20%) 0
Ondrej Hudlicky 5 2 (40%) 0
Remi Collet 5 0 (0%) 0
Rex Dieter 5 1 (20%) 0
…and also 256 other reporters who created less than 5 reports each, but 437 reports combined!

1 The total number of new reports (including “excess reports”). Reopened reports or reports with a changed version are not included, because it was not technically easy to retrieve those. This is one of the reasons why you shouldn’t take the numbers too seriously, but just as interesting and fun data.
2 Excess reports are those that were closed as NOTABUG, WONTFIX, WORKSFORME, CANTFIX or INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Excess reports are not necessarily a bad thing, but they make for interesting statistics. Close manual inspection is required to separate valuable excess reports from those which are less valuable.
3 This only includes reports that were created by that particular user and accepted as blockers afterwards. The user might have proposed other people’s reports as blockers, but this is not reflected in this number.

The most visible person here is Dhiru Kholia, who mass-reported over 100 bugs about packaging guidelines violation. When it comes to standard bug reports, the shining star here is a Red Hatter Adam Williamson. We also have quite a few community people at the top, namely Reartes Guillermo, Andre Robatino, sangu, John Reiser, Mark Hamzy, Dawid Zamirski, Flóki PálssonLeslie Satenstein and Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek. And of course there are hundreds of others, who reported just a few bugs each, but it all sums up in an amazing number of bug reports. Thank you all!

Fedora 19 Alpha – updates testing

This is a trimmed list of people who provided feedback in Bodhi for all updates proposed into Fedora 19 in the specified time period. The purpose is to make sure that broken updates do not enter the stable repository and the release continuously stabilizes.

Test period: Fedora 19 branch time – Fedora 19 Alpha release (2013-03-12 – 2013-04-23)
Testers: 98
Comments1: 278

Name Updates commented
patches 47
misc 19
akurtakov 16
raven 16
adamwill 16
kevin 15
kalev 13
pbrobinson 5
kparal 4
petersen 4
spstarr 3
mfabian 3
ankursinha 3
sharkcz 3
miketc302 3
bruno 3
deanhunter 3
robatino 3
mschwendt 3
jerboaa 2
maners 2
elad 2
twaugh 2
adomurad 2
bellet 2
ajax 2
gustavold 2
egreshko 2
mkrizek 2
boblfoot 2
yelley 2
bruce89 2
satellit 2
dwa 2
kraman 2
nucleo 2
…and also 62 other reporters who created less than 2 reports each, but 62 reports combined!

1 If a person provides multiple comments to a single update, it is considered as a single comment. Karma value is unimportant.

The top contributor is T.C. Hollingsworth (patches), who provided feedback to the most updates by far. Also from the community Piotr Drąg (raven) and Kalev Lember (kalev) were near the top as well. The most active Red Hatter was Michael Scherer (misc). There are dozens of other people who tested an update or two. Thank you all. This type of testing is very useful and very easy to participate in. It’s the best place to start if you want help Fedora QA out a bit.

Summary

The testing seems to be going well and Fedora 19 seems to go much smoother than Fedora 18 had. Thanks all contributors!

If you are interested in raising the Fedora quality up, help us out. Read QA/Join, follow the announcements and talk to us in #fedora-qa on IRC and test list. We will love to see you!


When reading the statistics, please take it with a grain of salt. The numbers are not directly comparable. People might see some reports as more valuable than others. Some people tested a lot of components, but haven’t found many problems (but that also helps). Some people used their skills in other areas than those mentioned. This is not meant to be a comparison chart, but a well-meant “thank you” letter.
The statistics were generated by these scripts.