You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Move documented reclaim_age option to correct location
The reclaim_age is a DiskFile option, it doesn't make sense for two
different object services or nodes to use different values.
I also driveby cleanup the reclaim_age plumbing from get_hashes to
cleanup_ondisk_files since it's a method on the Manager and has access
to the configured reclaim_age. This fixes a bug where finalize_put
wouldn't use the [DEFAULT]/object-server configured reclaim_age - which
is normally benign but leads to weird behavior on DELETE requests with
really small reclaim_age.
There's a couple of places in the replicator and reconstructor that
reach into their manager to borrow the reclaim_age when emptying out
the aborted PUTs that failed to cleanup their files in tmp - but that
timeout doesn't really need to be coupled with reclaim_age and that
method could have just as reasonably been implemented on the Manager.
UpgradeImpact: Previously the reclaim_age was documented to be
configurable in various object-* services config sections, but that did
not work correctly unless you also configured the option for the
object-server because of REPLICATE request rehash cleanup. All object
services must use the same reclaim_age. If you require a non-default
reclaim age it should be set in the [DEFAULT] section. If there are
different non-default values, the greater should be used for all object
services and configured only in the [DEFAULT] section.
If you specify a reclaim_age value in any object related config you
should move it to *only* the [DEFAULT] section before you upgrade. If
you configure a reclaim_age less that your consistency window you are
likely to be eaten by a Grue.
Closes-Bug: #1626296
Change-Id: I2b9189941ac29f6e3be69f76ff1c416315270916
Co-Authored-By: Clay Gerrard <clay.gerrard@gmail.com>
0 commit comments