Skip to content

Improvement/cldsrv 646 #5853

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: development/9.1
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Improvement/cldsrv 646 #5853

wants to merge 2 commits into from
+37 −10

Conversation

benzekrimaha
Copy link
Contributor

@benzekrimaha benzekrimaha commented Jul 1, 2025 •
edited by jira bot
Loading

Issue : CLDSRV-646

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jul 1, 2025

Hello benzekrimaha,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Available options
name description privileged authored
/after_pull_request Wait for the given pull request id to be merged before continuing with the current one.
/bypass_author_approval Bypass the pull request author's approval ⭐
/bypass_build_status Bypass the build and test status ⭐
/bypass_commit_size Bypass the check on the size of the changeset TBA ⭐
/bypass_incompatible_branch Bypass the check on the source branch prefix ⭐
/bypass_jira_check Bypass the Jira issue check ⭐
/bypass_peer_approval Bypass the pull request peers' approval ⭐
/bypass_leader_approval Bypass the pull request leaders' approval ⭐
/approve Instruct Bert-E that the author has approved the pull request. ✍️
/create_pull_requests Allow the creation of integration pull requests.
/create_integration_branches Allow the creation of integration branches.
/no_octopus Prevent Wall-E from doing any octopus merge and use multiple consecutive merge instead
/unanimity Change review acceptance criteria from one reviewer at least to all reviewers
/wait Instruct Bert-E not to run until further notice.
Available commands
name description privileged
/help Print Bert-E's manual in the pull request.
/status Print Bert-E's current status in the pull request TBA
/clear Remove all comments from Bert-E from the history TBA
/retry Re-start a fresh build TBA
/build Re-start a fresh build TBA
/force_reset Delete integration branches & pull requests, and restart merge process from the beginning.
/reset Try to remove integration branches unless there are commits on them which do not appear on the source branch.

Status report is not available.

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jul 1, 2025

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • 2 peers

@benzekrimaha benzekrimaha force-pushed the improvement/CLDSRV-646 branch from 34e706c to 3dd3fbc Compare July 1, 2025 13:40
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 1, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 75.92%. Comparing base (c187ed4) to head (3dd3fbc).

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
lib/metadata/acl.js 98.85% <100.00%> (+0.16%) ⬆️ 
@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##           development/9.1    #5853      +/-   ##
===================================================
+ Coverage            75.89%   75.92%   +0.02%     
===================================================
  Files                  188      188              
  Lines                11975    11986      +11     
===================================================
+ Hits                  9089     9100      +11     
  Misses                2886     2886
Flag Coverage Δ
ceph-backend-test 45.40% <7.69%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
file-ft-tests 47.28% <7.69%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
kmip-ft-tests 26.96% <0.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
mongo-v0-ft-tests 47.72% <7.69%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
mongo-v1-ft-tests 47.73% <7.69%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
multiple-backend 33.94% <0.00%> (-0.04%) ⬇️
sur-tests 35.44% <0.00%> (+0.83%) ⬆️
sur-tests-inflights 36.51% <0.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
unit 66.86% <100.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️
utapi-v2-tests 33.30% <0.00%> (-0.04%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

francoisferrand
francoisferrand reviewed Jul 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@francoisferrand francoisferrand left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I understand this is a draft PR, but this is still a first stage of publicating the changes : so there should already be some PR comment and commit message to document what changing you are introducing.

lib/metadata/acl.js
};

// Split the storageClass and iterate over each one
if (replicationInfo) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this does not seem the right place to do this:

  • it is the goal of _getReplicationInfo to build the replication info
  • that function is already doing the parsing/splitting of storageClasses, and associated locationConstrainsts
  • the last param to getReplicationInfo indicates this is a MD-only operation (which currently should be replicated only to CRR), so this can be used deeper (currently this gets obfuscated in getReplicationInfo by converting it to const content = isMD || objSize === 0 ? ['METADATA'] : ['DATA', 'METADATA'], but this may be moved to _getReplicationInfo)

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jul 29, 2025

Branches have diverged

This pull request's source branch improvement/CLDSRV-646 has diverged from
development/9.1 by more than 50 commits.

To avoid any integration risks, please re-synchronize them using one of the
following solutions:

  • Merge origin/development/9.1 into improvement/CLDSRV-646
  • Rebase improvement/CLDSRV-646 onto origin/development/9.1

Note: If you choose to rebase, you may have to ask me to rebuild
integration branches using the reset command.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@francoisferrand francoisferrand francoisferrand left review comments

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@benzekrimaha @bert-e @francoisferrand