Skip to content
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

Make transform application transactional #2465

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jul 28, 2022

Conversation

lava
Copy link
Member

@lava lava commented Jul 25, 2022

📝 Checklist

  • All user-facing changes have changelog entries.
  • The changes are reflected on vast.io, if necessary.
  • The PR description contains instructions for the reviewer, if necessary.

🎯 Review Instructions

@dominiklohmann dominiklohmann added rc bug Incorrect behavior labels Jul 26, 2022
@lava lava force-pushed the story/sc-35706/transforms-duplicate-data branch from da1edec to d169fbe Compare July 28, 2022 10:05
@lava lava changed the title wip: Make transform application transactional Make transform application transactional Jul 28, 2022
@lava lava marked this pull request as ready for review July 28, 2022 10:06
@lava lava force-pushed the story/sc-35706/transforms-duplicate-data branch from d169fbe to 3a7c4f7 Compare July 28, 2022 10:06
Copy link
Member

@dominiklohmann dominiklohmann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We paired on this and tested it extensively by crashing intentionally in various places.

@lava lava enabled auto-merge July 28, 2022 18:31
@lava lava merged commit 338cc5e into master Jul 28, 2022
@lava lava deleted the story/sc-35706/transforms-duplicate-data branch July 28, 2022 18:31
@@ -23,6 +23,26 @@

namespace vast::system {

caf::expected<atom::done>
posix_filesystem_state::rename_single_file(const std::filesystem::path& from,
const std::filesystem::path& to) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Doesn't rename this more than a single file? Just curious why not go with a plain filesystem rename, which should work for directories as well, no?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you proposing to change the name OR the semantics of this function?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The name only, because it actually renames directories as well.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Incorrect behavior
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants