Fix Broken Clone Snapshot CS Update #64116
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
We must not remove the snapshot from the initializing set in the `timeout` getter. This was a plain oversight/mistake and went unnoticed. It can lead to the removal of a valid snapshot clone from the cluster state in rare circumstances (e.g. when a node concurrently joins the cluster or a routing change happens as it did in the linked test failure). Closes elastic#64115
original-brownbear
added
>non-issue
:Distributed Coordination/Snapshot/Restore
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/es-distributed (:Distributed/Snapshot/Restore) |
elasticmachine
added
the
Team:Distributed (Obsolete)
original-brownbear
added a commit
to original-brownbear/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 25, 2020
It's confusing and slightly error prone (see elastic#64116) to handle the timeouts via overrides but the priority via a field. This simplifies the code to to avoid future issues and save over 100 LOC.
Contributor
Author
|
This is the short version of the fix, for |
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks Francisco! |
original-brownbear
added a commit
to original-brownbear/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2020
We must not remove the snapshot from the initializing set in the `timeout` getter. This was a plain oversight/mistake and went unnoticed. It can lead to the removal of a valid snapshot clone from the cluster state in rare circumstances (e.g. when a node concurrently joins the cluster or a routing change happens as it did in the linked test failure). Closes elastic#64115
original-brownbear
added a commit
to original-brownbear/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2020
We must not remove the snapshot from the initializing set in the `timeout` getter. This was a plain oversight/mistake and went unnoticed. It can lead to the removal of a valid snapshot clone from the cluster state in rare circumstances (e.g. when a node concurrently joins the cluster or a routing change happens as it did in the linked test failure). Closes elastic#64115
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2020
We must not remove the snapshot from the initializing set in the `timeout` getter. This was a plain oversight/mistake and went unnoticed. It can lead to the removal of a valid snapshot clone from the cluster state in rare circumstances (e.g. when a node concurrently joins the cluster or a routing change happens as it did in the linked test failure). Closes #64115
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2020
We must not remove the snapshot from the initializing set in the `timeout` getter. This was a plain oversight/mistake and went unnoticed. It can lead to the removal of a valid snapshot clone from the cluster state in rare circumstances (e.g. when a node concurrently joins the cluster or a routing change happens as it did in the linked test failure). Closes #64115
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 28, 2020
It's confusing and slightly error prone (see #64116) to handle the timeouts via overrides but the priority via a field. This simplifies the code to to avoid future issues and save over 100 LOC. Also this fixes a bug in `TransportVotingConfigExclusionsAction` where trying to instantiate a time value with a negative time could throw and unexpected exception and as a result leak a listener.
original-brownbear
added a commit
to original-brownbear/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 28, 2020
It's confusing and slightly error prone (see elastic#64116) to handle the timeouts via overrides but the priority via a field. This simplifies the code to to avoid future issues and save over 100 LOC. Also this fixes a bug in `TransportVotingConfigExclusionsAction` where trying to instantiate a time value with a negative time could throw and unexpected exception and as a result leak a listener.
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 29, 2020
It's confusing and slightly error prone (see #64116) to handle the timeouts via overrides but the priority via a field. This simplifies the code to to avoid future issues and save over 100 LOC. Also this fixes a bug in `TransportVotingConfigExclusionsAction` where trying to instantiate a time value with a negative time could throw and unexpected exception and as a result leak a listener.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We must not remove the snapshot from the initializing set
in the
timeoutgetter. This was a plain oversight/mistakeand went unnoticed. It can lead to the removal of a valid
snapshot clone from the cluster state in rare circumstances
(e.g. when a node concurrently joins the cluster or a routing
change happens as it did in the linked test failure).
Closes #64115
Marking as non-issue as this was not released in any version.