[8.x] Forbid the removal of the write block if the index is read-only
#120647
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
tlrx
added
>non-issue
:Distributed Indexing/Recovery
| if (blocks.hasIndexBlock(index, block)) { | ||
| blocks.removeIndexBlock(index, block); | ||
| changed = true; | ||
| if (block.contains(ClusterBlockLevel.WRITE)) { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In relation to my comment on the v9 PR, just noting that this should follow whatever we do on that PR.
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I updated the behavior in the V9 PR and here, see this comment
tlrx
force-pushed
the
2025/01/22/forbid-write-block-removal-8.x
branch
from
b418880 to
7d57b16
Compare
tlrx
force-pushed
the
2025/01/22/forbid-write-block-removal-8.x
branch
from
114ae6e to
e84ed85
Compare
Member
Author
|
This is ready for another review, the behavior has been updated and is described in this comment. |
henningandersen
approved these changes
Jan 27, 2025
| private static void verifyReadOnlyIndices(@Nullable Set<Index> readOnlyIndices, ClusterBlocks blocks) { | ||
| if (readOnlyIndices != null) { | ||
| for (Index readOnlyIndex : readOnlyIndices) { | ||
| if (blocks.indexBlocked(ClusterBlockLevel.WRITE, readOnlyIndex.getName()) == false) { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similar to the 9.0 PR, I think we should use the new hasIndexBlockLevel here?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, I pushed 66325bf (use hasIndexBlockLevel at the ClusterBlocks level, while the other is at the Builder level).
Member
Author
Member
Author
|
Thanks Henning! |
tlrx
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 28, 2025
) Ensure that a `write` block cannot be removed on a read-only compatible index in version N-2, while allowing to change a `read_only` block into a `write` block if needed as well as closing/reopening such indices. Requires #120647 to be merged on `8.x`. Relates ES-10320
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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.
Forbids on
8.xthe removal/update of awriteblock if at least one node of the cluster cannot write the index.Backport of #120648 for 8.18.
Relates ES-10320