-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 559
Implement Sweep V0 for testing GC Sweep with shorter timers #11084
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.
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
20 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
dab8b4b
Implement Sweep V0
markfields 0408a59
simplify sweepIfEnabled
markfields f7db1b9
giut
markfields ff991b1
Move storage policy definition/calculation up to Document Service Fac…
markfields d1647e5
Merge branch 'main' into pr/markfields/11084-2
markfields 4e2b91a
Revert changes covered by PR #11168
markfields 204df72
Override epochTracker snapshot expiry via config setting
markfields 334a48e
Revert attempt at disabling snapshot expiry in driver
markfields e5e6fe8
Add initial tests for GC Configuration
markfields 87e1a42
Initial gcConfig refactor
markfields 3d9e1cc
Implement SweepV0 test config
markfields 50806ff
Properly use SweepV0 status in gc.ts
markfields d545845
PR Feedback
markfields b2d9d1c
Write to metadata new persisted values
markfields bfb24e4
Set sessionExpiryTimeoutMs regardless of sweep status
markfields 99aa1f6
Decoupline sweepAllowed from timeouts
markfields ae52f9e
Fix tests
markfields b0cb381
effectiveSessionExpiryTimeoutMs for this session's expiry
markfields d515a6b
Move snapshotCacheExpiryMs handling out of gcConfig.ts
markfields 5153301
Remove final //* todo comments
markfields File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shouldn't this code run only when summary is generated? I understand the desire to go faster, but will it cause trouble? Maybe not, but worth considering all the interesting cases.
It sounds like it's created in every container, including non-summarizing container. This user may not have write permissions to a file. Will it result in some errors? Or all the modifications we do here results in no ops and only reflect back to file through summarizer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It does only run when the summary is generated, if you look at its call site and keep tracing back.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But yes, this class is instantiated for all clients. Maybe we should think about if this is necessary and/or expensive.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually it's kind of nice that even main clients get this class instantiated, because then I can do things like throw an error to close the main container if we try to open a test mode document we don't understand (see top of configForExistingContainer function)