rgw: set init_check_compat when bucket sync status doesn't exist

[cbodley]

existing buckets aren't able to resume incremental sync after upgrade to multisite reshard, because the compatibility check wasn't being enabled

Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/59211

Show available Jenkins commands

• jenkins retest this please
• jenkins test classic perf
• jenkins test crimson perf
• jenkins test signed
• jenkins test make check
• jenkins test make check arm64
• jenkins test submodules
• jenkins test dashboard
• jenkins test dashboard cephadm
• jenkins test api
• jenkins test docs
• jenkins render docs
• jenkins test ceph-volume all
• jenkins test ceph-volume tox
• jenkins test windows

[cbodley]

output from bucket sync run after deleting the bucket.full-sync-status object with rados rm:

2023-03-29T11:04:59.519-0400 7f9b56841f80 20 data sync: writing bucket sync status during init. state=incremental. marker=

output from bucket sync run after bucket sync init:

2023-03-29T11:13:45.132-0400 7f6fa523cf80 20 data sync: writing bucket sync status during init. state=full. marker=

[mkogan1]

tested with downstream equivalents of PRI Pacific <--> SEC Nautilus, bi-directional 1 M obj sync repro

before this fix, the objects from Nautilus would not transfer to Pacific while objects from Pacific would transfer to Nautilus
[left Pacific, right Nautilus]

after this fix PR the sync between Pacific and Nautilus works both ways
[left pacific, right Nautilus]

[mattbenjamin]

woot!

[cbodley]

before this fix, the objects from Pacific would not sync to Nautilus while objects from Nautilus would sync to Pacific

thanks for testing, @mkogan1. it would be great if this resolves both upgrade issues, but i worry that we might be missing something here. this fix should only apply to Pacific syncing objects from Nautilus, not the other way around

[mkogan1]

before this fix, the objects from Pacific would not sync to Nautilus while objects from Nautilus would sync to Pacific

thanks for testing, @mkogan1. it would be great if this resolves both upgrade issues, but i worry that we might be missing something here. this fix should only apply to Pacific syncing objects from Nautilus, not the other way around

@cbodley apologizing for the confusion, the fix indeed applies to Pacific syncing objects from Nautilus edited the original message with the correct wording

[mattbenjamin]

but is there then an issue in the reverse direction that customers are experiencing?

[cbodley]

@cbodley apologizing for the confusion, the fix indeed applies to Pacific syncing objects from Nautilus edited the original message with the correct wording

okay, thanks

[cbodley]

jenkins test make check

[cbodley]

passed qa after reruns; see #50648 (comment) for details