Skip to content

Fix ingestion from raft session >=10#2727

Open
francoisferrand wants to merge 1 commit intodevelopment/9.1from
bugfix/BB-759
Open

Fix ingestion from raft session >=10#2727
francoisferrand wants to merge 1 commit intodevelopment/9.1from
bugfix/BB-759

Conversation

@francoisferrand
Copy link
Contributor

The JSON was causing the raftId string (which is the http body of the response) to be returned to
the code as an array of string : [ '1', '3' ]. Which was worked-around by taking the first element.
That fix worked for raft sesion < 10, but breaks when raft session cluster grows.

The fix is to properly define the model, with the payload attribute allowing to indicate that the
body of the request should map to a specified field of the model.

Impact is limited since we only make a call to this API in a single place.

Issue: BB-759

The JSON was causing the raftId string (which is the http body of the response) to be returned to
the code as an array of string : [ '1', '3' ]. Which was worked-around by taking the first element.
That fix worked for raft sesion < 10, but breaks when raft session cluster grows.

The fix is to properly define the model, with the `payload` attribute allowing to indicate that the
body of the request should map to a specified field of the model.

Impact is limited since we only make a call to this API in a single place.

Issue: BB-759
@francoisferrand francoisferrand requested review from a team, benzekrimaha and maeldonn March 25, 2026 08:48
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Mar 25, 2026

Hello francoisferrand,

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.

@claude
Copy link

claude bot commented Mar 25, 2026

LGTM

Review by Claude Code

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 74.79%. Comparing base (3cc85bb) to head (b92f082).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
lib/queuePopulator/IngestionProducer.js 69.94% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

Components Coverage Δ
Bucket Notification 80.37% <ø> (ø)
Core Library 80.69% <100.00%> (-0.06%) ⬇️
Ingestion 70.84% <100.00%> (ø)
Lifecycle 79.09% <ø> (ø)
Oplog Populator 85.06% <ø> (ø)
Replication 61.09% <ø> (ø)
Bucket Scanner 85.76% <ø> (ø)
@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##           development/9.1    #2727      +/-   ##
===================================================
- Coverage            74.81%   74.79%   -0.03%     
===================================================
  Files                  201      201              
  Lines                13529    13529              
===================================================
- Hits                 10122    10119       -3     
- Misses                3397     3400       +3     
  Partials                10       10              
Flag Coverage Δ
api:retry 9.28% <0.00%> (ø)
api:routes 9.09% <0.00%> (ø)
bucket-scanner 85.76% <ø> (ø)
ft_test:queuepopulator 9.11% <0.00%> (ø)
ingestion 12.66% <100.00%> (ø)
lib 7.82% <0.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
lifecycle 18.98% <0.00%> (ø)
notification 1.03% <0.00%> (ø)
replication 18.89% <0.00%> (ø)
unit 51.02% <0.00%> (ø)

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Mar 25, 2026
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Mar 25, 2026

Request integration branches

Waiting for integration branch creation to be requested by the user.

To request integration branches, please comment on this pull request with the following command:

/create_integration_branches

Alternatively, the /approve and /create_pull_requests commands will automatically
create the integration branches.

Copy link
Contributor

@SylvainSenechal SylvainSenechal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

probably gonna have some nice conflict on waterfall

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants